The Assembly met at noon (Mr Speaker in the Chair).
Members observed two minutes’ silence.

Assembly business

Mr Kieran McCarthy: On a point of order, Mr Speaker.

Mr Speaker: Order. I first wish to make a statement on a previous point of order.
At the sitting on Tuesday 12 February, Mr Billy Hutchinson asked on a point of order why the time allocated by the Business Committee to the debate on the motion ‘Protecting Children, Supporting Parents’ (2000) was extended.
The Deputy Speaker put the question that the debate be extended on the basis that it appeared to be the clear wish of all Members present; there was no dissenting voice. In the event, almost no extra time was required for the debate.
I must make it clear that Standing Orders make no provision for such an extension. Indeed, it is clearly the role of the Business Committee alone to allocate times for categories of business; Standing Order 10(2) refers. Therefore, the question of extending the time was not in order. Where Members have tabled a motion that they would perceive as requiring a substantive debate, they should make that known to their representative on the Business Committee.
I wish to make it clear that the events that took place during the motion ‘Protecting Children, Supporting Parents’ (2000) are in no way to be construed as setting a precedent. Such a question should not be put again under current Standing Orders.

Royal Assent

Mr Speaker: I wish to inform the House that the Game Preservation (Amendment) Bill has received Royal Assent. The Game Preservation (Amendment) Act (Northern Ireland) 2002 became law on 13 February 2002.

Assembly business

Mr Kieran McCarthy: On a point of order, Mr Speaker. On 24 September 2001, the Assembly unanimously agreed a motion standing in my name
That this Assembly calls on the Executive to establish an interdepartmental working group to make recommendations on the removal —

Mr Speaker: Order, order. I must caution the Member. I am prepared to take a point of order if that is genuinely what it is, but not if it is a question of making a speech or a political point.

Mr Kieran McCarthy: The point is that the Assembly unanimously agreed to set up an interdepartmental working group, yet I received a reply from the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister to say that that was not allowed.

Mr Speaker: That is not a point of order. If the Member wishes to draw my attention to a problem that he perceives to be of a constitutional nature between the Assembly and the Executive, he should do so with me privately in the first instance, and then we can see what appropriate action can be taken.

Rev Dr Ian Paisley: On a point of order, Mr Speaker. If the ruling that you have just made reflects how matters stand, Standing Orders must be changed. No House that I know of is not master of itself. The House should be sovereign, especially when it is unanimous, so we must look at the Standing Orders.

Mr Speaker: It is perfectly in order for the Procedures Committee to look at the Standing Orders. Several arguments can be adduced in either direction. Sometimes it is not hard to reach unanimity in the House because so few Members are present. If my attention is drawn to the absence of a quorum, the House must suspend. In such contexts, to get the leave of the House may not be too difficult.
The Member has raised a very clear argument. It is quite appropriate for that matter to be brought to the Procedures Committee, which, if it wishes, can bring the matter to the House. That is the proper order of things.

Mr Peter Robinson: On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Will you confirm that, although the procedure was invalid, the original decision was not invalid even though it may have been taken after the allotted time?

Mr Speaker: The Member is correct. It is inappropriate for the Speaker to make a ruling in such post hoc circumstances that has a retrospective outcome.

Public Petition: Closure of Mosside Primary School

Mr Speaker: Mr Ian Paisley Jnr has begged leave to present a public petition in accordance with Standing Order 22.

Mr Ian Paisley Jnr: I beg leave to present a petition from residents in the village of Mosside in north Antrim. The petition refers to the proposed closure of Mosside Primary School later this year and is signed by 200 people from the village who are opposed to the closure of that small, rural primary school. The petition says that closure will damage the future of the village and remove from children a local school that has an impressive record of good results, in spite of shortfalls in departmental resources and competition from other local schools.
To remove a school from any village decimates the heart of a village and takes children from the area. The closure of the school will inconvenience the local rural community and cause great upset. The petitioners also make clear that, alongside educational and community arrangements for maintaining the school, there is a substantial question of the safety of children on the roads.
Mr Paisley Jnr moved forward and laid the petition on the Table.

Mr Speaker: I shall convey the petition to the Minister responsible and to the Chairperson of the associated Committee.

Kilkeel Fishing Tragedy and North/South Ministerial Council: Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights

Mr Speaker: I have received notice from the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development that she wishes to make a statement on the North/South Ministerial Council, which met in the Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights Commission sector on 1 February 2002 in County Armagh. The Minister also wishes to address a more immediate matter that happened over the weekend.

Ms Brid Rodgers: With your indulgence, Mr Speaker, before I make my statement on the Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights Commission sectoral meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council, I wish to make a few remarks on the recent fishing tragedy in Kilkeel.
The entire House will join with me in expressing our deepest sympathy to the Greene family and to the entire fishing community on this unspeakable tragedy, which has taken the lives of three generations of one family, including that of an eight-year-old boy. I have visited members of the family, whose main concern is to find the boat and recover their loved ones’ bodies.
As soon as I became aware of the need for naval support to assist the search, I spoke to British Minister John Spellar and to the Irish Government. My concern was to secure the necessary back-up as quickly as possible. It became clear that the Royal Navy did not have an adequately equipped naval vessel available in local waters. I am, however, pleased to report that the Irish naval vessel LE Eithne is being mobilised and will leave its base in County Cork this afternoon. It is expected to arrive on the County Down coast in the early hours of Tuesday morning.
I pay tribute to the local fishing fleet and to the other boats, including our fisheries protection vessel, the Ken Vickers. They have worked tirelessly in the past couple of days on this very sad search. We can only hope that the arrival of the LE Eithne will help to bring some solace to the Greene family.
I also express my appreciation to the British Government for their co-operation, and to the Irish Government for their speedy response to this awful human tragedy.
The seventh meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council for the Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights sector took place on Friday 1 February 2002 at the Slieve Gullion Courtyard, Killeavey, south Armagh.
Following nomination by the First Minister and Deputy First Minister, Mr Dermot Nesbitt and I represented Northern Ireland. Mr Frank Fahey, Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources, represented the Irish Government. The papers for the meeting were issued to Executive Committee members on 28 January.
The meeting opened with a report from the chairman of the board of the Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights Commission, Mr Peter Savage. The report detailed the board’s progress in work on shellfisheries, the interpretive centre and marine tourism. He also referred to the review of the Loughs Agency’s staffing structure, which Ministers had requested be carried out following their approval of an interim staffing structure. A draft report on the review, carried out by PriceWaterhouseCoopers, was presented to the agency on 9 January. The draft report was forwarded to the sponsoring Departments for comment and considered by the board at a meeting during the last week of January. My Department is considering the report as a matter of priority and will respond to it as soon as possible.
Dr Pat Griffin, a member of the board of the Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights Commission, then gave an account of a recent visit to Holland by board members and Loughs Agency staff. Holland has one of the most efficient and sustainable mussel industries in Europe, and the agency chose that destination as it represented a useful learning opportunity.
The visit incorporated trips to licensed sites, the Fisheries Research Institute and the auction facilities. The agency was impressed by the emphasis placed on such environmental factors as the sustainability of bird populations and the treatment of predators. The agency was also impressed by the industry’s capacity to identify and move mussel seed between different plots deemed suitable for different stages of mussel growth, and with the efficiency of the electronic auction system, which can accept bids for mussel stock from around the world. It was apparent to our visiting colleagues that good management of the shellfisheries in Lough Foyle and Carlingford Lough has the potential to create a valuable export market to Holland.
The chief executive of the agency, Mr Derick Anderson, provided the meeting with an explanation for the delay in presenting accounts for the agency’s predecessor, the Foyle Fisheries Commission, and the knock-on delay that that has caused in presenting agency accounts. He explained that a computerised accountancy system had been introduced, on which all accounts operated accurately with the exception of the nominal ledger. The difficulties with the nominal ledger were not fully exposed for some time, as the Foyle Fisheries Commission and, latterly, the Loughs Agency were under resource pressure due to additional work as a result of an expanding remit.
To rectify the problems with the nominal ledger, the Loughs Agency employed consultants PriceWaterhouseCoopers, and recruited and trained additional administrative staff. With that extra support, the agency was able to provide all required information to facilitate completion of the audit of outstanding accounts.
Fully audited accounts for the Foyle Fisheries Commission for the years 1997, 1998 and 1999 were due to be forwarded to the agency during the week ending 15 February. Responsibility for the audit of accounts for the Loughs Agency for the years 2000 and 2001 rests with the Northern Ireland Audit Office. It has already undertaken the bulk of the groundwork, but it requires closed 1999 accounts before it can finalise the audit of the later accounts.
It is anticipated that the accounts for 2000-01 will be completed in March. The chief executive apologised for the delay in finalising the outstanding accounts and assured Ministers that appropriate mechanisms, staff and controls are now in place to ensure that the Loughs Agency does not cause such delays again.
The chief executive advised the meeting of the progress that has been made towards completing the agency’s interpretive centre. The agency is undertaking a baseline survey to establish the level of children’s knowledge of the fishery resource, and some video footage has been shot of salmon spawning in the River Finn. Plans for the interior design and decoration of the centre are under way, and the agency is on target and within budget to open it by September 2002.
Ministers were updated on the agency’s plans to host a workshop on research into seal predation of salmon and on the continuing positive impact of the salmon carcass tagging scheme, particularly the significant downturn in illegal netting and the increase in logbook returns, especially from anglers. That enhancement of the agency’s management data will make a positive contribution to its ability to manage and conserve the valuable salmon fisheries in the Foyle area.
The chief executive referred to the agency’s work with angling clubs and fishery owners on applications for EU funding for several enhancement projects. He looks forward to the positive contribution such projects have the potential to make to increasing the number of salmon in the system.
Ministers took the opportunity to thank the agency for its continuing good work, and, in particular, they urged it to do everything in its power to advance its outstanding accounts.
Ministers considered and approved the agency’s corporate plan for 2002-04 and its business plan for 2002. The corporate plan sets out its objectives for the management, protection, conservation and improvement of salmon, inland and shellfish fisheries in the Foyle and Carlingford areas, and the development of marine tourism. It also outlines its objectives for the statutory equality obligations, the development of its staff, and health and safety at work and includes budgetary details.
The business plan sets more specific targets for 2002. It addresses issues such as aquaculture licensing, the reduction of illegal fishing, the provision of advice on a range of issues, including pollution prevention, awareness raising, and the provision and use of a variety of management information to inform and support the management of the fisheries. Printed copies will be available from the agency’s headquarters in March.
Ministers considered a paper on the progress made in establishing an advisory forum that was approved at an earlier meeting. Its purpose is to ensure that those with an interest in the use and management of the resources in the Foyle and Carlingford areas have a mechanism through which their views may be put to the agency. The selection process was undertaken on the agency’s behalf by management consultants. There were some initial difficulties in recruiting a sufficient number of people to represent all the interests, but we were pleased to note that, following a further targeted recruitment exercise, the full range of representation has been achieved. Members of the advisory forum include representatives of shellfishing, draft net fishing, drift net fishing, anglers, fishery owners, tourism, environmental groups, local businesses, councils, ports and harbours, forestry and agriculture.
The advisory forum held its first meeting at the end of January, when members were given detailed presentations on the work of the agency and its future plans. It is proposed that, when it meets again in March, individual focus groups will be set up to concentrate on advising the agency on specific areas of interest.
Ministers noted the final version of the agency’s equality scheme, which received approval from the Equality Commission on 7 November 2001, and approved its New TSN action plan. Both the equality scheme and the action plan underpin the agency’s work, and their implementation will strengthen its commitment to equality, fairness, and tackling social need and social exclusion. Copies of both documents are available from the agency on request.
Ministers considered a paper on the difficulties presented by an aquaculture site in Carlingford Lough, licensed by the Department of the Marine and Natural Resources, the boundaries of which have caused problems for Northern fishermen trying to access the public mussel fishery. Minister Fahey accepted that a speedy resolution was required, and officials from both Departments, along with staff from the Loughs Agency, have been asked to resolve the issue by the next meeting.
Progress on the drafting of the Foyle and Carlingford fisheries Bill was discussed next. The Bill proposes to extend the functions of the agency in line with the North/South Co-operation (Implementation Bodies) (Northern Ireland) Order 1999 and to update the Foyle fisheries Acts. To date, good progress has been made in resolving some intricate policy matters. As the legislation affects both parts of the island of Ireland, it was agreed that drafting of the provisions would be split between the relevant offices, North and South. Although the Office of the Legislative Counsel has produced its part of the Bill, progress has been hampered in the South by the involvement of their draftsman in drafting other Bills. However, Minister Fahey agreed to encourage the Attorney-General’s Office to give the Bill priority, with a view to producing the South’s contribution to the draft as soon as possible to facilitate introduction in the Assembly and the Dáil at the earliest opportunity.
The meeting considered a paper on the transfer of the functions of the Commissioners of Irish Lights to the Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights Commission. It is clear that the functions of the commissioners will remain a reserved matter, with the UK Government continuing to exercise policy and funding control as a consequence of their responsibility as trustees of the general lighthouse fund. Therefore, it appears that the Lights Agency element of the Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights Commission will not comply with the definition of an implementation body, as set out in strand two of the Good Friday Agreement. Members will be aware that the matter has been referred to the North/South Ministerial Council in its institutional format. At its meeting on 17 December, it was agreed that officials from both Administrations and from the joint secretariat of the North/South Ministerial Council would consider the matter further, and offer advice and recommendations to the council. Preliminary discussions have begun with a view to submitting a report and recommendations to the next meeting of the Council in its institutional format.
The North/South Ministerial Council agreed to meet again in April 2002, and it approved a joint communiqué, a copy of which has been placed in the Assembly Library.
This statement was made on my behalf and on behalf of Mr Nesbitt.

Rev Dr Ian Paisley: I am sure that the House will endorse the Minister’s remarks at the beginning of her statement and will wish to express its sympathy also. It has been said that great grief is not good at talking, and how true that is. Who can express the depth of sorrow caused by the wound that has been inflicted by the loss of three generations of one family? I am sure that everyone in the Assembly understands that.
I welcome the fact that vessels will be sent to that area. I received a representation from Kilkeel yesterday. I spoke to Mr Spellar’s personal secretary and pointed out that the fishermen were worried that bad weather would mean that the vessels would not be of much use. However, the weather conditions were favourable.
Given the size of the British naval service, I am amazed that it does not have a boat with the equipment to do this job. We are grateful to the Dublin authorities for sending a vessel. However, I ask the Minister to press the British authorities further to send a fully-equipped naval vessel that has the ability to carry out the soundings necessary to search for the lost vessel. Two boats could cover a greater area than one.
Everyone knows that it is imperative to find the vessel, so that the bodies of those who have been lost can be brought back and receive a burial, and so that the family can have one sore anointed with healing balm. The other sore and its scar will remain on their lives for ever. I wish the boats well in their efforts to find the bodies.
I salute all the fishermen in that area and all those who went out in boats to help the search. I also salute the strength of the family at this time and trust that the bodies will soon be brought back to the home port.

Ms Brid Rodgers: I thank the Member for his remarks and expression of sympathy to the family. I am deeply grateful that a vessel is being prepared to leave Haulbowline in County Cork at 2.00 pm to travel up the Irish coast. It is hoped that it will reach the Down coast by 2.00 am tomorrow morning, and I understand that it will begin the search immediately.
I recognise that the family’s grief is being added to by the fact that the bodies have not been recovered and that, as Dr Paisley has said, it would be a great ease to them if they could be recovered. I have been informed that the police diving team has offered its services to the coastguard, while the fishing fleet and the Ken Vickers are fully involved in the search. Should it become apparent that a wreckage has been found, the police divers will offer help to the coast guard or the lifeboat service, whichever may be appropriate. That is an example of the great co-operation that there has been throughout the community, North/South, east/west and within all the Government agencies to try to resolve one of the greatest tragedies that I have known in fishing history in my lifetime in this part of the world. We must also remember that a brother of Michael Greene was drowned in Kilkeel harbour 13 years ago. This has been a real tragedy for this family.

Mr George Savage: On behalf of my party, I would like to express our sympathy to the family. Our thoughts are with all those involved.
I welcome the Minister’s statement and am glad that great interest was taken in the salmon fishing industry and also in the tagging scheme. What impact have the salmon that escaped from the farm fishery had on wild salmon, and have any steps been taken to ensure that such an incident does not happen again?

Ms Brid Rodgers: My understanding is that the salmon that escaped from the Glenarm fishery have had no significant impact.

Mr P J Bradley: As an Assembly Member for South Down, I wish to be associated with the expressions of sympathy from the Minister and the Committee Chairperson. The tragic events of last Thursday night will be remembered in the Mournes for generations to come. I also wish to put on record my appreciation of the services that worked around the clock on the rescue mission and then the search, including the local lifeboat service, which did a tremendous job co-ordinating all those involved. I would not like this occasion to pass without paying tribute to the Minister for her efforts yesterday to expedite the search.
What plans does the Loughs Agency have to develop marine tourism in Carlingford Lough and Lough Foyle, and when does the agency intend to publish those plans?

Ms Brid Rodgers: The Loughs Agency is currently preparing a tourism strategy that will set out the agency’s plans for the development of marine tourism in the Foyle and Carlingford areas.
The agency plans to concentrate on improving marine tourism by developing the recreation and leisure aspects of fisheries and catchments. However, it does not propose to provide direct funding. The agency also intends to commission a marine tourism audit in the Foyle and Carlingford areas to ascertain the level of facilities currently available. The agency hopes to publish its marine tourism strategy later this year.

Mr Gerry McHugh: Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I extend my sympathy, and that of my Colleagues, to the Greene family and the local community. Such communities have always been prepared to face the worst that the sea has often dealt to them: Nevertheless, such incidents are still an enormous tragedy for them.
I welcome the Minister’s statement, particularly her comments on the work that continues on the overall meeting. The Fisheries Bill was discussed, as was the progress made, North and South. We need the draft legislation as soon as possible to facilitate the early introduction of the Bill in the Assembly and in the Dáil. What progress has been made on that legislation, given the fact that it has been delayed?

Ms Brid Rodgers: Legislation is necessary to provide the Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights Commission with the power to license and develop aquaculture. The drafting of the legislation is progressing, and I intend to introduce the Bill later this year. My officials are fully committed to taking the Bill forward, but progress is subject to parallel development in both jurisdictions.
The Bill was initially delayed due to several difficulties in establishing a mechanism to enable those people aggrieved at decisions of the Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights Commission on aquaculture applications to appeal. It also proved more difficult than anticipated to obtain the agreement of legal advisors in both jurisdictions on several policy matters. Most of those issues have now been resolved, but further delay has occurred because, due to competing priorities, the draftsman in the South has been unable to produce a draft of the Bill. However, we hope that that matter will now be addressed. I have spoken about the matter to Minister Fahey, who is arranging to have the issue prioritised. I hope to be able to progress the legislation soon.

Mr Jim Wells: The Minister will accept that one of the most painful duties that we have had in the last few days has been to visit the homes of those who were so tragically struck by this dreadful incident. Can she assure me that her Department will put the maximum pressure on the Marine Accident Investigation Board to ensure that a Royal Navy vessel, in addition to the Irish Navy vessel, is sent immediately to this area to assist? It is unfortunate that no Royal Navy vessel was available for dispatch to the area. Although we appreciate the help offered by the Irish Government, the situation flags up a concern for the future.
Does the Minister also agree that it is vital that lines of communication be clarified, so that if such a dreadful incident should happen again there would be one point of contact with the marine authorities to ensure that a vessel would be dispatched immediately? One of the great difficulties yesterday was that no one was certain of who had the final authority on the matter. That was one of the reasons for the delay.
Finally, can she assure the House that if the trawler is found, and if it is deemed necessary to raise it to the surface, there will be no delay in doing so and a Government Department will fund that work? The bodies need to be found, so as to give closure to the family affected by this terrible event.

Ms Brid Rodgers: I agree. I have done everything in my power to ensure that the necessary back-up support of naval vessels from either or both jurisdictions is made available, and I will continue to use my influence to ensure progress on that.
I have already reported about the progress so far. I understand from Mr Wells that there was some confusion yesterday morning in the lines of communication. I heard about the incident from the fishermen’s representative at 2.00 pm on the radio and was able to establish immediately the responsibility of the Department for Transport, Local Government and the Regions across the water and the Ministry of Defence, which has the remit of the naval fleet. It is a reserved matter, of course, so responsibility lies with those Departments. However, as the Minister responsible for fisheries here, I felt that it was incumbent on me to do everything possible to ensure that the necessary back-up was provided. I was pleased to be able to do that and to have the L E Eithne prepared and soon to be on her way up here. Any other matters relating to the operation of the naval fleet are not my responsibility, but I take the point. It is important that back-up should be available when and if necessary.
If the trawler is located, I will do everything possible to ensure that it is raised, because that is extremely important for the families.

Mr Jim Wilson: I welcome the explanation in the report, and I note the apology about the delay in finalising the Foyle Fisheries Commission’s accounts and the Loughs Agency’s accounts. I also welcome the establishment of the advisory forum and the focus groups, which will represent interest groups in the Loughs Agency’s catchment area. However, was the opportunity taken to impress on Minister Fahey that, although he is reducing the number of net licences and quotas, the Republic of Ireland still lags behind Northern Ireland and other European countries on measures to bring to an end the slaughter — and that is the only word that I can use to describe it — of the salmon off our coasts?

Ms Brid Rodgers: I stated in my report that the agency’s presentation of the 2000-01 accounts was delayed because the accounts of the Foyle Fisheries Commission had not been finalised. We now hope to have full accounting in March. The corporate business plans are currently with the designers, and they should be available in March. Copies will be made available from the Loughs Agency’s headquarters in Prehen and its regional office in Carlingford. The agency’s equality scheme will be published in full in this April or May, and its New TSN action plan can be viewed on its web site.
The Loughs Agency has no plans at the moment to buy out salmon nets, but the stocks of salmon returning to the Foyle catchment area are managed effectively to ensure that spawning escapement targets are achieved each year. The effectiveness of the conservation and protection regulations introduced by the agency to help manage the fish stocks are continually kept under review using data collected from fish counters, population surveys and catch returns. As escapement targets are currently being achieved, and a stable commercial and recreational fishery exists, the agency has no plans to introduce further conservation measures at this time.

Mr Joe Byrne: I welcome the Minister’s statement, particularly her reference to the current state of salmon stocks in the Foyle system. I commend the good work of many angling clubs, through several projects. What measures has the Loughs Agency taken to conserve and protect salmon stocks in the Foyle?

Ms Brid Rodgers: In association with my Department, Queen’s University Belfast and the Irish Marine Institute in Dublin, the Loughs Agency has engaged in a two-year genetic study of salmon populations for the purpose of obtaining further management information to ensure the future sustainability of salmon stocks in the Foyle system. The agency has also introduced a salmon carcass tagging scheme, which prohibits the sale of untagged salmon. That has resulted in a substantial reduction in the levels of poaching in the Foyle and Carlingford areas, thus enabling the agency to direct more resources toward enhancement, development and reinstatement of the catchments. Therefore, ultimately, it will further improve the productivity of the catchments. The tagging scheme also requires anglers to complete logbooks detailing the number of catches made. Those logbooks will provide the agency with valuable information that will help to ensure that the fisheries of the Foyle and Carlingford areas continue to be managed effectively.

Mr Mick Murphy: Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I too want to extend my sympathy to the Greene family on the awful tragedy, especially since I come from near that area. Can the Minister throw any further light on the apparent red tape that delayed the operational search and rescue mission travelling to the scene of the Kilkeel tragedy? Will she look at ways of liaising with her Dublin counterparts to ensure a quicker response from their naval resources in the future on operations affecting our fishing fleet?

Ms Brid Rodgers: I am not sure that I understood the second question. I will deal with the first, and perhaps the second can be repeated.
As I said, I responded as soon as I was made aware of the issue at 2.00 pm, when I was on my way to visit the families. I did not come across any red tape difficulties. I was able to establish immediately that the Department for Transport, Local Government and the Regions and the Ministry of Defence across the water shared the responsibility — the former is responsible for the coastguard and the latter for the naval vessel. I assure the Member that between 2.00 pm and 5.00 pm, I was able to reach a resolution.
The Member may be referring to the long delay in getting the vessel up here. It takes a while, particularly on a Sunday evening, to assemble the crew — at least five or six hours, perhaps longer during a weekend. It then takes several hours to prepare the vessel for steaming and considerable time for the vessel to come from Cork to the Down coast. There was another delay while they ensured that they were able to get the divers, an important element for the recovery.
I am not sure whether I fully understood or heard the second part of the question.

Mr Speaker: Perhaps the Member might help us by repeating the second part of his question.

Mr Mick Murphy: The Dublin authorities were not contacted until yesterday. The tragedy occurred on Friday, but the Minister said that it was when she was on her way to visit the family yesterday that she became aware of the red tape that affected the operation. Will the Minister contact her Dublin counterparts to ensure that there will be an immediate response if a tragedy happens again in the lough or in that area?

Ms Brid Rodgers: I explained to the Member that I did not encounter any such red tape difficulties. When the tragedy happened, the Ken Vickers, which is the departmental fisheries boat, the local fishing fleet and the coastguard were all involved in the search.
The official search was called off when it became clear that it was a search for bodies. At that point the naval vessel became an issue, and I immediately contacted the Dublin authorities once I was made aware of that. As I said, I am grateful for the very quick response that I received. The delay from yesterday until today was due to the logistics of getting the vessel on the sea.

Mr Oliver Gibson: Through the Chair, I express my sympathy to the bereaved family. I ask the Minister to ensure that in such an emergency, the first contact will always be made with our own United Kingdom Government and its Royal Navy.
With reference to the Minister’s North/South Ministerial Council meeting, have there been any investigations into freshwater mussels and their use as a potential for export markets? Has any investigation been carried out into the zebra mussel, a freshwater mussel that has become a plague in most of the Southern rivers and lakes, and is now a threat to our rivers and estuaries? What progress has the Minister made in ensuring that our waters are not polluted by this plague of freshwater mussels?
Secondly, the Minister referred to the completion of the agency’s interpretive centre. Where will this centre be, and how many staff will be employed?
Thirdly, the fishermen of Lough Foyle tell me that poaching still causes their greatest loss of revenue. Very few salmon make it into the River Mourne, through Sion Mills and up to the headwaters of the Foyle, the Strule, the Drumragh, and the Camowen. What effective action has been taken? Despite the attempt at tagging, there has not as yet been a successful effort to control illegal poaching of salmon in the Foyle estuary or the Foyle waters. I appeal to the Minister, on behalf of the people of those areas who depend on the industry for tourism, to make every effort to ensure that adequate salmon stock emerge in those headwaters.

Ms Brid Rodgers: I thank the Member for his numerous questions, of which I lost count.
I am disappointed at the suggestion that my first contact was not with the UK Government. I made it clear that I contacted the UK Government and then the Irish Government. It does not matter to the families in distress who comes to the rescue. I, and the whole community in Kilkeel, am aware of that.
I will write to Mr Gibson to inform him of the situation in regard to freshwater mussels, as I do not have all the details.
I did not hear the question about the interpretive centre.

Mr Speaker: The Member asked where it is.

Ms Brid Rodgers: The centre is in Derry/Londonderry, Doire Chomcille. [Laughter].
I think the Member understands the answer.

Mr Speaker: It is, after all, an interpretive centre. [Laughter].

Ms Brid Rodgers: It would be wiser to say that it is in Prehen, and that would avoid any problems.

Dr Esmond Birnie: I thank the Minister for both parts of her statement. At the end of her statement, she said that the Lights Agency element of the Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights Commission would not comply with the definition of an implementation body, as set out in strand two of the Good Friday Agreement.
Have the Minister and her Executive Colleagues considered the possibility that the Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights Commission could become an implementation body under the auspices of the British-Irish Council?

Ms Brid Rodgers: That has not been considered at this time, but I take the point.

Mr Jim Shannon: What happened last week in Kilkeel was a tragedy. As a Member for the Strangford constituency, I remember a similar search off the Isle of Man for the body of the crewman and boat owner Tom Hughes. At that time, the help of the Royal Navy was requested. The good work of the locals, who dived and searched, led to the retrieval of the body for the funeral.
A rapid reaction is needed. What is the Minister doing to ensure that that legislation can be changed? She said that it was a reserved matter. However, what representations can the Minister or her Department make on that?

Mr Speaker: Order. It is wise to point out to the House that questions to a Minister must refer only to the Minister’s responsibility. It is clear that the burden of the question that the Member is asking is on a reserved matter; which is the responsibility of the Secretary of State for Defence. For the Member to tread on that is to tread on the parliamentary responsibilities of his colleagues who are Members at Westminster. It may well be that he wishes to press the Minister on making representations. That would not be inappropriate. However, to ask the Minister questions about matters outwith her responsibilities would be out of order.

Mr Jim Shannon: What representations are the Minister and her Department making to Westminster to see what can be done to make the Royal Navy more accountable and reactive when help is needed? We require an effective and co-ordinated response. Our fishermen deserve the full support of the authorities. A clear message must be sent from the Assembly and the Minister that we are doing everything that we can to help them.

Ms Brid Rodgers: Since yesterday, my only priority has been to do everything in my power as a Minister, and to use all my influence, to assist the recovery of the bodies and the boat. I have bent all my energies towards that. I have not looked at any further steps that might be taken: That is for another day. My priority is to try to relieve, in some manner, the awful distress that the Greene family is going through.

Mr Ian Paisley Jnr: I also associate myself with the expressions of grief to the Greene family of Aughnaloopy and Ballymartin. At this tragic time, it is hard to conceive of any rainbow that could brighten such a shadow of tears for that family.
In her statement, the Minister said that an advisory forum had been established. Which management consultants were engaged by the Department to carry out that work? How were they selected, and how much did it cost the Government? Did the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development have to foot the entire bill?

Ms Brid Rodgers: The management consultants were PriceWaterhouseCoopers, as I believe I said in my statement. I did not hear the second part of the question.

Mr Ian Paisley Jnr: How were they selected, and how much did it cost the Government? Did the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development have to foot the entire bill?

Ms Brid Rodgers: The Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights Commission selected the management consultants by a process of tendering.

Mr Ian Paisley Jnr: What was the cost?

Ms Brid Rodgers: I will check with the Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights Commission. I do not have those details, but I will provide the Member with that information.

Mr Speaker: That brings to an end questions to the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development.

Railway Safety Bill: First Stage

Mr Peter Robinson: I beg leave to lay before the Assembly a Bill [NIA Bill 3/01] to make provision with respect to the safety of railways.
Bill passed First Stage and ordered to be printed.

Mr Speaker: The Bill will be put on the list of future pending business until a date for its Second Stage has been determined.

Budget Bill: Second Stage

Dr Sean Farren: I beg to move
That the Second Stage of the Budget Bill (NIA Bill 2/01) be agreed.
In moving the motion, I will draw attention briefly to a few points. The debate follows the Bill’s First Stage on Tuesday 12 February, and the Supply resolutions for the 2001-02 spring Supplementary Estimates and the 2002-03 Vote on Account, which were also considered and approved last week. The Bill can be given accelerated passage because the Committee for Finance and Personnel has confirmed that, in line with Standing Order 40, the Committee is satisfied that there has been appropriate consultation on the public expenditure proposals contained in the Bill. This condition has been met, and the confirmation was given in a letter dated 5 February from the Chairperson of the Committee for Finance and Personnel to the Speaker. I welcome the Committee’s assistance in the matter, especially in view of the concerns that the Committee has expressed about the process and its role within it. For the record, I understand those concerns and recognise the need to address them over the coming months.
The purpose of the Budget Bill is to give legislative effect to the resource Estimates approved through the Supply resolutions passed last Monday. Given the wide-ranging and valuable debate that we had then, I do not intend to delay the start of today’s debate with unnecessary repetition of the detail that I covered last week when I introduced the Supply resolutions. Members have received copies of the detailed spring Supplementary Estimates booklet and the Vote on Account statement. Copies of the Budget Bill and associated explanatory and financial memorandum should also be available. However, for the benefit of the Assembly, I wish to summarise briefly the main features of the Bill in accordance with the nature of the Second Stage debate envisaged under Standing Order 30.
The Bill authorises the issue of £198 million from the Northern Ireland Consolidated Fund in respect of the spring Supplementary Estimates for 2001-02 and appropriates this sum to specific services as set out in schedule 1. Schedule 2 authorises the use of additional resources for 2001-02 amounting to £574 million and details the revised limits for accruing resources.
The Vote on Account provided for in the Bill for 2002-03 is to allow funds to continue to flow to public services for the early months of the incoming financial year until the Main Estimates can be presented to, and considered by, the Assembly. For the Vote on Account, the Budget Bill seeks the issue from the Consolidated Fund of the sum of £3,936 million and its appropriation to services as set out in schedule 3. In addition, it seeks the Assembly’s authorisation for the use of resources amounting to £4,486 million as set out in schedule 4.
I was most interested to hear the many views expressed by Members during last week’s useful debate. I endeavoured to answer most of the questions at the time or to provide responses later, either personally or from my ministerial Colleagues as appropriate.
There is little more that I can usefully add on the substance of the Budget Bill, but I shall respond to any points raised by Members on the principle of the Bill.
(Madam Deputy Speaker [Ms Morrice] in the Chair)
The Assembly offers Members a great opportunity to influence public expenditure allocations, to hold Departments accountable for those allocations and to ensure that the outcomes promised as part of the spending programmes are delivered. As I said earlier, our budgetary processes are still evolving, and each budgetary exercise is important in helping us to understand problems or difficulties that we can improve on or address. I accept that we may need to refine our processes, where that is possible, within the limitations of the existing system. However, it is fair to say that the Assembly has undertaken its responsibilities for public expenditure, authorisation and control with considerable care and diligence.
I wish to draw attention to the fact that, in the coming months, the Executive will be engaged in intensive preparations for, and negotiations on, the spending review 2002. That review will set parameters for expenditure for the following three years.
The challenges posed by the need to meet the significant investment requirements of many of our services are probably already apparent to all Members. In the past two years, we have seen the expenditure limits imposed by the available resources, and the difficult choices that are necessary in order to ensure that fair and equitable allocations were made. The Executive are examining, in a fundamental way, the basis of current resource allocations by the Treasury. In that respect, the Barnett formula is being subjected to detailed and rigorous analysis to determine the extent to which it should, or should not, continue to be the basis for determining those resources. Alongside that examination, the Executive, as Members may be aware, are also conducting detailed needs assessments across all the Departments. Those assessments are intended to provide information on the precise scale of need in each Department with respect to the services for which it has responsibility.
It is widely recognised that there is a major backlog in investment and that that backlog exists across almost all our services and infrastructure. We have to ensure, therefore, that our case is as strong, robust and well founded as we can make it.
Our needs are considerable. Given the signals from London, there is little doubt that we have a major task ahead in ensuring that the outcome of the forthcoming spending review is as favourable to us as it is possible to make it.

Mr Francie Molloy: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for his statement and for his recognition of the Committee’s concerns. The Committee for Finance and Personnel confirmed to the Assembly that it was satisfied that the requirements of Standing Order 40(2) regarding consultation had been met, so that the Bill could proceed under the accelerated passage procedure.
The Committee did not do that lightly, and there was quite a debate on the issue, because it places a premium on the involvement of the Assembly and its Committees in the Budget process. The Committee for Finance and Personnel will wish to ensure that the arrangements for consulting Committees during the impending review year are comprehensive, timely and effective, and meet with the approval of all Committees. The Minister should be alert to the concerns regularly expressed by the Assembly Committees that they are not consulted effectively by Departments and that the timely provision of budgetary information by Departments is not always as good as it should be to allow Committees to perform their statutory role.
It is essential, therefore, that when the Minister announces the timetable for the spending review in March, Committees be built into the consultation process from the beginning. Before signing off on accelerated passage for the next Budget Bill in June, the Committee for Finance and Personnel will need to be assured by other Committees that appropriate consultation has taken place and is planned before the draft Budget is introduced in September. That process of consultation is important in the spending review year. Committees will wish to see a positive benefit from the resources obtained from the Treasury, based on the needs and evaluation work of the Committees concerned.
The Committee for Finance and Personnel recognises and supports the Executive’s priority focus on the need for substantial additional resources for the Health Service, education and the infrastructure. There are depressing daily accounts of how hospitals are failing to meet the needs of the sick. Pictures of frail and elderly people on hospital trolleys do not do any of us any credit. It is important that we recognise that those who elect us expect and demand more. We must make a difference where it matters most. Innovative ways to raise revenue without targeting the most needy must be used. The effectiveness and efficiency of public services must be examined rigorously to ensure best value.
Assembly Committees play a key role in scrutinising the work of Departments and in holding Ministers to account to the Assembly for the services for which they are responsible. Committees should be encouraged to target areas of poor performance and encourage value for money so that resources are freed up to meet those high priority needs. Departments still have a silo mentality.
Spending patterns must be challenged, evaluated and reset strategically. Appropriation of resources must be targeted to encourage greater co-operation between Departments. Short-term resources must be targeted on the immediate needs of the sick and must be matched by long-term strategic investments in health and education services. Better access to health services, and improvements in the social and physical environment of the population are needed. Long-term investments will lead to long-term savings through a more integrated approach in the public services.
The Minister’s recent decision to review the effectiveness of the in-year monitoring procedure is welcomed, and indicates his concern that Departments are not entirely effective in quantifying their budget needs.
The Assembly is being asked to consider a Bill that appropriates a considerable amount of resources. Members will wish to be assured that those precious resources are deployed with maximum impact. The Committee for Finance and Personnel accepts that the Budget Bill is the end of a process of consultation with Departments. It also acknowledges that the process must focus on effective engagement with the Assembly and its Committees at an early stage if the Executive are to be truly accountable to the Assembly.
The Committee for Finance and Personnel looks forward to playing its part in the spending review process and encourages other Committees to play their part. They must be consulted and form part of the bidding process to ensure the effective use of resources. Go raibh maith agat.

Mr James Leslie: When we debated the Second Stage of the Government Resources and Accounts Bill, I was the only person who expressed the view that, rather than making the accounts clearer, resource accounting would make them more complicated. Now that we have had a first look at the new-style Estimates and the Budget Bill, I feel vindicated in having expressed that view.
The suggestion put forward by the Committee for Finance and Personnel to have some form of training and elucidation on the new accounting style provided for Members is valid. I hope that that training will proceed shortly. I have no reason to believe that the Department is resistant to that suggestion and look forward to implementing it.
After the recent Enron affair, many comments were made concerning creative accounting in the private sector. I expressed the view that a snag in moving to resource-based accounting is that the scope for creative accounting is considerably greater in the Government sector. The problem is not as severe when the Government are not responsible for the Supply side, as is the case here.
Nonetheless, Members must work diligently to understand how resource-based accounting works. I do not fully understand it myself. However, examining the use of assets, and how they are treated in the Government’s books, will be helpful in informing our long-term investment decisions, especially those decisions on infrastructure.
The Minister emphasised that the three-year spending review will happen this year. I trust that the needs and effectiveness evaluation will be completed in time for the spending review, but it may be a close call. I am not sure how much input the Assembly and its Committees will have into that review. As I have said in other debates, it is no use trying to influence a Budget once it has been read. We must start to influence next year’s Budget now. We have about six months in which to influence the Budget. Once figures are written down and the draft Budget is read in the autumn, the scope for influencing the final Budget becomes extremely limited.
This is the second full cycle in which the Chairperson of the Finance and Personnel Committee, Mr Molloy, and I have made that point. It must be reiterated that Committees must start addressing budgetary issues immediately and in the coming months. There is a slight window in the Assembly’s agenda before a heavy legislative programme begins in April. That may be the best chance that we shall have to get to grips with the budgetary issues for next year.
I acknowledge the Minister’s comments on the Barnett formula and on proving the need for the resources that we currently receive. On the whole, we receive favourable treatment under the Barnett formula. I urge caution about following a divergent route, which carries the risk of a less favourable outcome. I note that comments were made recently in Westminster to the effect that it was unlikely that Barnett would be reviewed for the time being. I suspect that that will be to our advantage. I welcome the Budget Bill.

Prof Monica McWilliams: The final spring Supplementary Estimates contain an amazing error. I want to give the Minister the opportunity to respond to the statement that £93 million was allocated in the Department of Employment and Learning for fees and expenses for chairpersons and members of the industrial and fair employment tribunals. I doubt that the fees and expenses of those tribunals amounted to £93 million. The Minister should respond to that before the Bill goes through; he should give us the accurate figure.
I am also concerned about an issue that relates to the announcement that was made last year about free nursing care. That became a huge issue for the Budget. I wrote to the Minister asking him to outline the easements — the surrendered moneys for which Departments can bid — and I discovered that £3·3 million had been surrendered, despite the fact that most of the population in Northern Ireland would have been told that no money had been available for free nursing care. I am concerned that £3·3 million was left sitting in the Department’s budget and was then surrendered. No doubt the Department made bids for other moneys.
Later in the year an announcement was made that resources would be found for free nursing care. I am concerned about that. Can the Minister reassure the House that the public are not being led to believe that that was new money, given that it had been there in the first instance?
It may have been the case that we were not in a position to provide free nursing care because the legislation had not gone through. Perhaps that is the message that should have gone out at the time, rather than a message of insufficient funds being available. I know that £3·3 million might not have met all of the costs of introducing free nursing care at that time. However, before the Budget Bill goes through, we have an opportunity to clear the matter up. There was a surrender of £3·3 million. I have written to the Department and have received some explanation of it, but it is important that the matter be brought before the House.

Dr Sean Farren: I thank the Members who have spoken during the Second Stage of the Budget Bill. The House has discussed many of the issues previously. It is not surprising, therefore, that a full-scale debate, as has occurred on previous occasions, has not developed this afternoon. I assure the Chairperson of the Committee for Finance and Personnel that full consultation has, to the best of the Department’s ability and within the time constraints applying, been taking place in the past two years. That consultation has been with the Committee for Finance and Personnel and all the other Committees, through contacts with officials and Ministers in the various Departments.
The point that I made, which was made on several occasions by my predecessor, is that Committees are able to take the initiative by probing likely developments with respect to the relevant departmental budgets. Committees could perhaps do that more vigorously in anticipation, rather than simply awaiting the outcome of proposals relating to departmental bids. As was reflected in Mr Leslie’s comments, Members do not have to await the end of the preparatory stages of the Budget for that kind of probing to take place. Committees can begin to make their investigations now. Indeed, I believe that there was an example of that last week from the Chairperson of the Committee for Social Development, which I commended. Prioritisation was taking place in a way that I felt was helpful to the deliberations of that Committee and to its engagement with the Department. Let us see Committees being more willing to take the initiative in relation to the budgetary planning process.
On the comments made by the Chairperson of the Committee for Finance and Personnel, and by Prof McWilliams, I wish to emphasise that in-year monitoring takes place to determine what might be available to be allocated to help meet pressing needs identified by Departments. When Departments make bids with respect to what might be available from in-year monitoring, the Department of Finance and Personnel responds to how Departments have prioritised their particular needs.
The Executive agreed in principle to the introduction of free universal nursing care for the elderly in nursing homes from April 2002. The Budget for 2001 contained £4·5 million to enable the introduction of free nursing care from October 2002. I emphasise that those who are unable to meet the costs of their care already have access to free nursing care, and that will continue.
Legislation must be introduced, and procedures for the assessment of free nursing care developed and implemented. The figure of £4·5 million represents a part-year cost — it is not a reduction in the number of eligible people. The full-year cost is likely to be some £9 million. Additional funds will have to be found to support that in future years.
The process to ensure the delivery of what the Assembly sought is under way. The timetable for that is constrained by the need to have the necessary legislation in place, and not only by finance issues.
Ms McWilliams mentioned the allocation of £93 million to the Department of Employment and Learning. That appears to be a typing error, and should read as £93,000. That figure will be checked precisely, and the information will be provided to the Member in writing.
Mr Leslie mentioned the needs assessment exercise. It is hoped that some initial findings will be available at the end of March or early April to inform our approach to the spending review and the budgetary planning in which we shall be engaged in the next few months.
I acknowledge Mr Leslie’s point about the Barnett formula. However, the Member should acknowledge that there is a need and an obligation on the Executive, and especially on the Department of Finance and Personnel, to examine in considerable detail the extent to which the Barnett formula is robust enough to deliver our needs. We should be able to clearly identify any shortcomings in the formula and act upon them. We are currently examining the formula and its application to ensure that the bids are fairly and equitably met. That will also ensure that resources are available to meet the considerable challenges that I referred to in the concluding part of my opening address.
I have covered all the main points that were raised by the three Members who have spoken. I will correspond with Members on any point that I have overlooked.

Ms Jane Morrice: As this is a finance Bill, Members will be aware that the vote requires cross- community support.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved (with cross-community support):
That the Second Stage of the Budget Bill (NIA Bill 2/01) be agreed.

Personal Social Services (Preserved Rights) Bill: First Stage

First Stage

Ms Bairbre de Brún: I beg leave to lay before the Assembly a Bill [NIA Bill 4/01] to make provision in relation to persons in residential accommodation with preserved rights under the Income Support (General) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 1987; and for connected purposes.
Molaim go dtugtar a Chéad Chéim don Bhille Seirbhísí Sóisialta Pearsanta (Cearta Forchoimeádta).
Bill passed First Stage and ordered to be printed.

Ms Jane Morrice: The Bill will be put on the list of pending business until a date for its Second Stage has been determined.
Personal Social Services (Preserved Rights) Bill: Accelerated Passage

personal social services (preserved Rights) Bill

Accelerated Passage

Ms Bairbre de Brún: I beg to move
That, in accordance with Standing Order 40(3), the Assembly grants accelerated passage to the Personal Social Services (Preserved Rights) Bill.
Molaim go dtugann an Tionól seo rith luathaithe don Bhille Seirbhísí Sóisialta Pearsanta (Cearta Forchoimeádta), de réir Bhuanordú 40 fo-mhír 3.
Nuair a tugadh isteach na socruithe cúraim phobail atá ann faoi láthair i 1993, bhí díolúine ag thart ar 9,000 duine i gcúram cónaitheach san earnáil neamhspleách ó na socruithe úra maoinithe agus bainistíochta sna seirbhísí sláinte agus sóisialta. Ina áit sin, fuair siad ceart forchoimeádta ar ráta ardaithe tacaíochta ioncaim as a ndíolfadh siad as a gcóiríocht chónaitheach.
Le gairid, rinne úinéirí tí agus a n-eagraíochtaí ionadaíocha uiríll faoina easpaí atá ráta na gceart forchoimeádta maidir lena gcostas feidhmithe. Lena chois sin, luadh go bhféadfadh an córas maoinithe a bheith ag clis ar dhaoine a b’fhearr a bhfóireadh cóiríocht thacaithe nó socruithe eile dóibh de bharr a easpa solúbthachta.
Mhol an Coimisiún Ríoga ar Chúram Fadtéarmach do Dhaoine Scothaosta i Sasana go mbreithneodh an Rialtas ar chóir íocaíochtaí cearta forchoimeádta i leas sóisialta a thabhairt faoin chóras cúraim phobail atá ann ó 1993; nó an bhféadfaí teacht ar réiteach éigin eile le haghaidh a thabhairt ar easnamh maoinithe an ghrúpa sin. Chomh maith le comhchomhairle an Choimisiúin Ríoga i mí Bealtaine agus i mí an Mheithimh 2000, rinne mo Roinn tuilleadh comhchomhairle áitiúla ar na roghanna. Bhíothas den tuairim gur chóir go n-aistreofaí freagracht as cásanna ceart forchoimeádta go gnáthshocruithe bainistíochta cúraim na seirbhísí sláinte agus sóisialta, mar gur measadh go raibh sé míchothrom go gcaithfí go difriúil leo thar na daoine sin a tháinig isteach sa chóras i ndiaidh Aibreán 1993.
Tá an Bille Seirbhísí Sóisialta (Cearta Forchoimeádta) á thabhairt isteach le freagracht as cásanna ceart forchoimeádta a aistriú go gnáthshocruithe bainistíochta cúraim na n-iontaobhas sláinte agus seirbhísí sóisialta ó Aibreán 2002, áit a gcuirfeadh an loighic í. Tabharfaidh an Roinn Forbartha Sóisialta Rialacháin isteach le deireadh a chur lena dteideal ar thacaíocht ioncaim ag ráta ardaithe.
Is eol do Chomhaltaí go bhfuil sé i gceist go reáchtálfaí an córas leasa shóisialta anseo comhionann leis an chóras sa Bhreatain. Cuirfear deireadh ansin le teideal ar leas sóisialta ceart forchoimeádta le héifeacht ó 8 Aibreán. Muna dtagaimid lena ndáta aistrithe, beidh cónaitheoirí agus a dteaghlaigh anseo faoi an-éiginnteacht, agus b’fhéidir go ndéanfadh sé an earnáil cúraim chónaithigh agus an earnáil tí altranais a éagobhsú. Muna bhfuil an reachtaíocht riachtanach in áit againn, beidh dhá rogha theagmhasacha ann; tá an bheirt acu casta, agus ní beag na deacrachtaí a thógfaidh siad.
When the current community care arrangements were introduced in 1993, approximately 9,000 people in residential care in the independent sector were exempt from the new health and social services funding and care management arrangements. Instead, they acquired a preserved right to an enhanced rate of income support with which to pay for their residential accommodation.
In recent times, there have been many submissions from homeowners and their representative organisations about the inadequacy of the preserved rights rate in relation to their operating costs. Furthermore, it has been suggested that, due to its inflexibility, the funding system may be failing some people, who may be better suited to either supported accommodation or alternative arrangements.
In England, the Royal Commission on Long Term Care for the Elderly recommended that the Government consider whether preserved rights payments and social security should be brought into the post-1993 system of community care funding or whether another solution could be found to address the shortfall in funding experienced by that group.
Further to the Royal Commission’s consultation, in May and June 2000, the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety carried out further local consultation on the available options. The overall opinion supported a transfer of responsibility for the preserved rights cases to the normal health and social services care management arrangements, as it was considered inequitable that those people be treated differently to those who entered the care system after April 1993.
The Personal Social Services (Preserved Rights) Bill is being introduced to transfer responsibility for the preserved rights cases to the normal care management arrangements of the health and social services trusts, where it more logically belongs, from April 2002. Regulations will also be implemented by the Department for Social Development to remove its entitlement for the enhanced rate of income support.
The intention is that the social security system here should run in parity with that in Great Britain. The entitlement to preserved rights social security in Great Britain will cease, with effect from 8 April. Failure to match that transfer date will result in considerable uncertainty for residents and their families here, and it could have a destabilising effect on the residential care and nursing home sector. If the legislation is not in place, we will be faced with trying to make appropriate contingency arrangements, which would not be a straightforward exercise.
In the absence of the necessary legislation, two contingency options are most apparent. However, both are complex and will create many difficulties. The Social Security Agency might be able to continue to pay the enhanced benefit rates. However, because the legislation for the transfer is already in place in Great Britain, no preserved rights rates of benefit have been set for the period from 8 April onwards.
If the Department for Social Development were to set a preserved rights rate, even for a short period, it would break parity with Great Britain. Furthermore, the functionality of the computer system that enables the social security offices to pay the rates to customers is provided from England and will be removed on 7 April. The Social Security Agency would then have to seek other methods of making payments to approximately 1,700 people.
The other contingency option would be for approval to be given for the trusts to make payments on an extra-statutory basis. That poses considerable difficulties also. Under article 36(a) of the Health and Personal Social Services (Northern Ireland) Order 1972, the trusts are barred from taking responsibility for those cases. Therefore, the Department would be seeking the agreement of the Department of Finance and Personnel to not only act in anticipation of impending law, but to act in contravention of the existing law. Even if that agreement were forthcoming, in addition to the administrative auditing and operational difficulties of acting in such a way, cases might slip through the net. That is because the Bill carries a provision for the sharing of information. Without that provision, it is impossible for the Social Security Agency and the boards and trusts to exchange personal details about the preserved rights customers to ensure that everyone is accounted for.
The Bill to enable the transfer is largely technical. It removes the current statutory bar to trusts taking responsibility for preserved rights cases and allows for the disclosure of information between the Social Security Agency and the boards and trusts to the extent that is necessary to ensure that all such cases are correctly identified.
The policy document for the Bill was first submitted to Sir Reg Empey and Mr Seamus Mallon last August. However, various delays and a request for further financial information meant that the Bill did not progress at the normal pace. That resulted in the Bill’s reaching the First Stage only today, which is a delay of more than four months from the date originally planned.
The remit of the Bill has been reduced to contain only those provisions that relate to the preserved rights transfer. Other provisions relating to nursing care costs and the professional body for nursing and midwifery will be contained in a separate Bill that will allow the normal Assembly procedures.
My officials met with the Committee for Health, Social Services and Public Safety to explain the background to the changes, the need for legislation and the circumstances that have given rise to the situation with which we are now faced, where accelerated passage procedure is being requested. While Committee members have natural reservations about the use of accelerated passage procedure, in this instance they have accepted that the need is genuine and that the circumstances are exceptional. I am grateful to the Committee members for that. Although I cannot guarantee that the need for accelerated passage will never arise again, I assure Members that the circumstances of this Bill are exceptional, and I do not anticipate encountering them again.
Standing Order 40 permits a Bill to proceed, using accelerated passage, with the leave of the Assembly. Accordingly, I seek the leave of the House to proceed with accelerated passage on the Personal Social Services (Preserved Rights) Bill.

Dr Joe Hendron: The Committee has considered the Minister of Health’s request for accelerated passage for the Personal Social Services (Preserved Rights) Bill. The Committee takes its responsibilities seriously and was concerned by the need to grant a public Bill accelerated passage, as that denies members the opportunity to scrutinise the Bill in detail during the Committee Stage. There is always a danger that bad legislation might be enacted if a Committee does not have the chance to consider the detail of a Bill. However, the Committee has questioned the Minister’s officials about the reasons for the Bill and about the need for accelerated passage. Today the Minister told Members why new arrangements need to be put in place to manage the care of people with preserved rights and why the Bill needs to be in place by the end of April.
The Bill deals with equity of treatment for residents of independent residential and nursing homes with preserved rights who, since 1993, have continued to receive social security funding towards their accommodation costs. Some 1,740 vulnerable people will be affected by the changes. Because of the need to protect those people, the Committee accepts that the Bill be considered under accelerated passage.
The Committee for Health, Social Services and Public Safety supports the motion.

Rev Robert Coulter: The reasons for the need for accelerated passage have been laid out clearly by the Minister. Although it is regretted that we will not have the opportunity to discuss a public Bill, in view of the reasons given — and in particular those relating to equity of treatment for patients — I have no hesitation in supporting the motion.

Mr Maurice Morrow: My party and I support the concept of accelerated passage. In her statement the Minister said that it was imperative to keep abreast with legislation in the rest of the United Kingdom. We agree with that.
However, there has been a major departure in her party’s stance on accelerated passage. About six months ago, accelerated passage was sought in the House for the Social Security Fraud Bill. Of course, her party put up a different argument then. I draw the House’s attention to what was said then, and I ask the Minister to comment, now that her party’s stance on this procedure has changed.
Speaking in this House on 18 June 2001, Mr Gerry Kelly said:
"The Minister has not given a good argument for accelerated passage, which is a bad method of putting any Bill through the Assembly. There are particular problems in the Bill, and every Member should have the opportunity to scrutinise it." — [Official Report, Bound Volume 11, Page 170].
Is it only when another Minister introduces a Bill, or when the issue of fraud is being discussed, that the Minister’s party has problems with accelerated passage?
Mr Kelly went on to say:
"It could affect people’s human rights and invade their privacy."
I suspect that they have no such concerns about the invasion of human rights or privacy in the Chamber. He continued:
"I oppose the use of the accelerated passage procedure, and I hope that others will do likewise."
I welcome the change of heart now. I do not know when the road to Damascus experience took place. No doubt we will be told today. However, the Minister has made it clear that she wants accelerated passage so that we can maintain parity with the rest of the UK. She has also made it clear that, while it is not her preference to ask the House for accelerated passage, she may have to do so. Methinks that there is a degree of hypocrisy. I will leave the matter there.

Ms Sue Ramsey: Go raibh maith agat. I will not get involved in Maurice Morrow’s rant on accelerated passage. Should he request a transcript of the Committee meeting in which the matter was discussed, he would see that our party has not changed its opinion on the need for accelerated passage.
I reluctantly support the motion. I am glad that officials are here today, because we had frank, and sometimes heated, discussions on the matter. As the Chairperson pointed out, we came to our decision reluctantly because, if it is approved accelerated passage, the Committee for Health, Social Services and Public Safety would not be able to scrutinise the Bill, clause by clause, during its Committee Stage. However, contrary to the beliefs of some Members — and I am glad that they find it so funny — 1,800 people would be disenfranchised if this Bill did not pass.
The Minister outlined the reasons why she is asking for the Bill to be given accelerated passage. It was submitted six months ago, in August 2001. Through discussions with departmental officials, the Committee found out that there were problems in the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister. The Committee told the officials that while Members were not happy, they did realise why the Department wanted their approval for accelerated passage.
We must be realistic, and we must establish what problems the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister had in this matter. Why have we waited six months for this Bill? With that in mind, my Committee Colleagues and I reluctantly support the motion to grant accelerated passage, but you can rest assured that we will examine the Bill — we will not forget about it simply because it will not go through Committee Stage. However, we will not be party to 1,800 people being disadvantaged due to mismanagement by the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister. Go raibh maith agat.

Prof Monica McWilliams: As Sue Ramsey rightly stated, every member of the Committee registered enormous concern when told that the legislation would require accelerated passage. This is the first time that our Committee has been asked to accelerate legislation. We were presented with several options, and it is correct that the 1,740 residents could be disenfranchised. The difficulty is that the Social Security Agency would have to calculate each payment manually, because, as the Minister stated, on 7 April 2002 the computer system will be closed down. When the Executive decide on legislation in the future, I suggest that if they do not meet their deadlines, a Minister be tasked to do 1,740 calculations manually. That would be the impact of failing to process legislation on time. We could have chosen to do that, but parity would have been broken — not in the rates but by requesting extra staff. It would be an extra cost to the Department for Social Development to continue that work after the computer system stops in Northern Ireland, as it will do elsewhere.
If the legislation had gone through the Committee, Members would have asked questions on it, so it is important that the Minister be given the opportunity to respond to those questions on the Floor. If £19 million was requested from the budget for the transfer from the Department for Social Development’s budget to the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety’s budget — plus a little over £2 million, making it £21 million in total — the concern is that that money would not necessarily be drawn down from the existing health and social services budget in future. That budget is under extreme pressure; all the budgets in the past year had easements or surrenders, but the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety surrendered only £4·3 million, which is a comparatively minimal amount. The Department is in no position to find this money internally. I hope that because this is a preserved rights issue, that money will be ringfenced and will not come out of current Departmental resources. I want the Minister to assure us of that, since we are giving accelerated passage to the Bill.
In response to Mr Morrow’s points, every time that we are asked to give accelerated passage, all Members, particularly those who sit on the relevant Committee, should explain their reasons for supporting acceleration. I would be concerned if the Assembly were to simply give a nod to accelerated passage.

Rev William McCrea: I have listened with interest to the debate thus far. When anyone calls a Sinn Féin Minister to account, it is noticeable that his speech is called a "rant". It has probably been noticed that the Member for West Belfast doth protest too much — she should stop crying. In fact, her bleating is false. Where is the Member who was so concerned about accelerated passage for the Social Security Fraud Bill — where is Gerry Kelly? He has disappeared. Sinn Féin has turned its policy on its head. I am sure that he was speaking with a good deal of authority, as he does when speaking for a breadth of organisations connected with IRA/Sinn Féin, when he said:
"I oppose the use of accelerated passage procedure,"
That is very clear: "I oppose it."
He added:
"… and I hope that others will do likewise."
That was a clear statement of opposition.
However, when accelerated passage is requested for a Bill that is supported by Sinn Féin and the Health Minister, that opposition goes away. My hon Friend Mr Morrow pointed out that there may be opposition only to the accelerated passage of the Social Security Fraud Bill — or does it go wider than that? We will find that out if Gerry Kelly appears before the end of the debate, or if he wants to oppose accelerated passage vigorously, or if Sinn Féin intends to vote against it. Once again there has been hypocrisy. Principle means absolutely nothing and is stood on its head when it suits the occasion.
It was pointed out before that it was not my hon Friend’s wish to use accelerated passage as normal procedure for a Bill but that the Social Security Fraud Bill had to be tackled in that way because it dealt with the serious matter of fraudulent activity throughout the Province.
Parity with the rest of the United Kingdom was established then, and I am glad that Sinn Féin is today stating that it wants parity with the rest of the United Kingdom. Sinn Féin can try to express that idea in another form of words, because it does not like to admit that it represents parity with the rest of the United Kingdom. It will be interesting to see whether Sinn Féin will admit that, even though those words seem to scorch the mouths of its members who utter them.
There is another serious matter. We have been told that the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister is sitting on Bills. That is a serious matter that must be tackled head-on. We have been told that the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Mr Blair, has many problems at home that must be addressed, and yet he tours the world. The First Minister and the Deputy First Minister have toured Brussels, toured America, toured everywhere, but they have not dealt with matters that are relevant at home. Therefore, it is not acceptable that the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister is impeding the progress of numerous Bills. I have heard that several other Bills have been stopped, because they are sitting on the desks of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister.
The reason for their impediment cannot be money, because many millions of pounds have been allocated. Its budget is almost as high as that for the entire Assembly, so the delay is not due to a lack of money. However, there seems to be a lack of will, and it is unacceptable that accelerated passage is being requested because of inaction by the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister. That issue must be scrutinised and the reasons must be smoked out. It must be brought out into the open.
I support the purpose of accelerated passage. It is important that there be parity with the rest of the United Kingdom and that our people should not be disadvantaged. However, Bills should not sit on the desks of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister. They should be processed in a proper and urgent manner.

Ms Bairbre de Brún: I thank Members for their interest. I will try to deal with all the issues raised.
First, the resource transfer has been confirmed for 2002-03 and 2003-04, and will be subject to the spending review process. I assure Members that I have no wish to ask the House to give a Bill accelerated passage. The circumstances of this Bill are exceptional, and I do not anticipate encountering them again.
During the debate, several Members referred to the circumstances of the delay. I want to give a fuller picture. On 9 August 2001, in the absence of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister, I submitted the policy document for this Bill to Sir Reg Empey and Mr Séamus Mallon for approval to submit it to the Executive. A reply giving me approval to proceed was issued on 17 September, conditional to further work being completed on the financial implications. It is important to note that that work had to be done and was one element of the cause of the delay. The additional work was not straightforward and involved liaison and agreement with the Department for Social Development on the transfer.
In view of the delays that had occurred since the policy document was first submitted, an additional paper was included with the revised policy document. That was resubmitted on 7 November, requesting approval to seek accelerated passage on the transfer of preserved rights cases to health and personal social services. Approval to prepare two Bills and to seek accelerated passage was received on 8 January. Approval to introduce the Bills to the House was sought from the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister and the Executive on 10 January. Approval from the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy Minister was received on 30 January, and Executive approval was received on 7 February.
Due to the various delays and the need for further financial information, that is being brought to the Assembly much later than we anticipated. Therefore, to avoid the difficulties that I outlined, we are asking for accelerated passage today.
I hope that I have covered all the points that Members raised. I apologise if I have missed any question. My officials will scrutinise the record of the debate, and I will write to any Member whose question has not been answered or fully covered. I thank Members again for their interest in the issue and the Committee for Health, Social Services and Public Safety for its help and support in the matter.

Ms Jane Morrice: Members will be aware that accelerated passage can be granted only by leave of the Assembly.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved:
That, in accordance with Standing Order 40(3), the Assembly grants accelerated passage to the Personal Social Services (Preserved Rights) Bill.

Ms Jane Morrice: The Bill will receive its Second Stage tomorrow, Tuesday 19 February.

Assembly: Enterprise, Trade and Investment Committee

Resolved:
That Mr Eugene McMenamin replace Mr Alex Attwood as a member of the Committee for Enterprise, Trade and Investment. — [Mr Tierney.]

Ms Jane Morrice: By leave, the Assembly shall suspend until 2.30 pm, when we shall resume with questions to the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister.
The sitting was suspended at 1.58 pm.
On resuming (Mr Speaker in the Chair) —

First minister and deputy first minister

I shall give advance notice that the first question to the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure will not be taken. Members may be aware that Mrs Nelis’s husband has been seriously injured, and she is unable to attend today.

Single Equality Bill

1. asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister if it intends to introduce a "publican’s defence" clause into the single equality Bill.
(AQO831/01)


7. asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister what assessment can it make in relation to the concerns raised by the Federation of Retail Licensed Trade and Northern Ireland Hotels Federation about their statutory duty to "preserve order" on their premises and about the draft single equality Bill; and to make a statement.
(AQO840/01)


We wish to take question 1 and question 7 together.
No decisions have been taken as to what provisions will be included in the single equality Bill. A policy paper setting out our proposals will be issued for consultation by the end of the year. Many licensees contend that an exemption is needed in anti-discrimination law to protect them against claims of discrimination in which they state that they are acting to preserve order as required by licensing laws. We shall take those views into account when forming our proposals.


I am encouraged by that response. By way of assistance, I suggest that the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister give serious consideration to including, in the single equality Bill, section 15(2) of the Equal Status Act 2000 in the South of Ireland. That might help to alleviate the problem.
Do the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister recognise the need for some degree of mediation or arbitration to be facilitated when there is a dispute over admission, rather than it ending up in court, as happens at present? That is unsatisfactory and somewhat expensive.


The Member has asked us to consider section 15(2) of the Republic of Ireland’s Equal Status Act 2000, which provides an exemption from anti-discrimination law for action taken by, or on behalf of, those who are licensed to sell alcohol when they are acting in good faith to ensure compliance with the licensing laws. The Republic of Ireland has a general provision, similar to that in our current legislation, which provides that nothing in the Equal Status Act 2000 shall be construed as prohibiting any action taken under any enactment. When forming our proposals, we shall consider the impact of the exemptions in the Republic and the experiences there.
The Member said that he was encouraged by my response. We shall take those issues into account. However, that will not predetermine our conclusions. I do not want anything to be misunderstood or misrepresented. It would be wrong for me to speculate on any measure that might be taken on mediation at this stage in advance of court action. However, we accept the Member’s point.


Question 7.


The Minister has already made it clear that he is grouping questions 1 and 7 together, and has had leave to do so. This is your opportunity for a supplementary question — if you wish to take it.


That was a misunderstanding.
Does the Deputy First Minister acknowledge that members of the Northern Ireland Hotels Federation and the Federation of Retail Licensed Trade wish to ensure that no one would be discriminated on grounds of religion, sex, political opinion or disability, and does he acknowledge that there is concern at the number of weak cases supported by the Equality Commission? I understand that about 80% of such cases have been lost, and others have been settled out of court to avoid legal costs.
Will he advise the House what financial penalty exists for those who take costly legal cases without having supporting evidence?


We are aware of the representations that have been made by the licensed and hotel trades. As I have said, we shall consider all the relevant issues as we prepare the single equality Bill. However, I am not in a position to speculate on any issues pertaining to the Equality Commission’s possible involvement, under the single equality Bill, in any cases that may be taken. We are looking at what the single equality Bill should provide for, and our focus should be on those legislative arrangements.


Will the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister accept that the proposed single equality Bill will put publicans under intense pressure to stop unruly elements from creating havoc on their property? It should be made clear that publicans should have the right to bar anyone. For example, someone wearing a Celtic top who walks into a bar full of Rangers supporters could, and probably would, lead to a breach of the peace.


Order. I am referring to the Chamber, not to the job of publicans.


The Member’s reference to the single equality Bill as it stands is somewhat erroneous. As has been indicated before in the House in answers from the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister, the single equality Bill has not yet come before the House. In relation to the matters under discussion, we have to take account of the requirements under licensing legislation that publicans ensure good order on their premises. We want to be certain that we take care to ensure that there are no breaches of the peace. We also want to make sure that the single equality Bill will be effective as an equality measure and will provide for common sense legislation in respect of all other considerations.

Visit to West Tyrone

2. asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister if the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister plan to tour West Tyrone soon.
(AQO825/01)


We have no plans to make a joint tour of West Tyrone in the near future.


I am slightly disappointed. Should the First Minister decide to visit West Tyrone, he will find that Ulster Unionists there are focused on their Unionism, despite being the minority community in the west. Indeed, the First Minister should also know that, during any visits that I make to Ulster Unionist Party groups in West Tyrone, I and they do not waste our time discussing any form of united or agreed Ireland, as some others have suggested.
In the event of a visit to West Tyrone, will the First Minister give me an assurance that he will take time to address the concerns of groups representing victims of terrorism in the west? Republican terrorists are still actively targeting members of those groups.


I am glad to receive the assurance from the Member that in his branches and association, local Unionists are not discussing any form of united or agreed Ireland. I was astonished at the claim made by a leading member of the DUP that that was happening. I wonder whether he has any evidence, and whether he would care to produce it. I dare say it is like so many things that we hear from that quarter — assertions without evidence.
Victims’ groups and individual victims from West Tyrone have played an important role in research recently carried out into service provision for victims. Officials from our Victims Unit have visited a number of victims’ support groups in the area during the past year and assisted with a variety of issues. A capacity- building programme to help victims’ groups increase their expertise in seeking and securing funding was recently completed, and several groups in the area participated.
On the question of the continuing targeting of individuals by paramilitary organisations, I am sure that Members will join with me in congratulating the police and security forces on their success in the neighbouring area of Coalisland this morning.


Hear, hear.


I have noted with some concern in recent weeks that questions of a very open kind have been tabled concerning constituencies. The supplementaries to those questions seem to bear little relation to the constituency concerned, which must disappoint the constituents. However, there is another dilemma about such questions open to the constituency alone. If there are only two further supplementaries, I am in the invidious position of discriminating against some Members or parties from that constituency, and it is not the Speaker’s place to do so.
I shall look carefully at the matter of open questions on constituencies, especially when they are not followed by supplementaries that are truly relevant. On this occasion, I shall permit all the parties that are represented in that constituency to have a supplementary question.


I am glad that the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister have no intention of touring the constituency of West Tyrone. They should now be aware of the insult that they delivered to the Unionist community last week when they both displayed Republican tactics by boycotting and abstaining from the vote on the provision of a memento for the primary schoolchildren of West Tyrone to mark the Golden Jubilee. Will the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister take this opportunity to apologise?


Order. I rule the question out of order, since the Member clearly ignored what I expressly said.


I assure the Speaker that my question is on a bread-and-butter issue. Given the high levels of unemployment in West Tyrone, can the Minister assure us that all industrialists — [Interruption].


Order.


May I start again, Mr Speaker? Given the high levels of unemployment in West Tyrone, can the Minister assure us that all industrialists who are interested in setting up in Northern Ireland are being encouraged to visit West Tyrone, and that they are being given every incentive to locate there? I particularly refer to my home town of Strabane, which has been plagued with high levels of unemployment for years.


Order. That is a question for the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment. However, as the First Minister appears to be ready with a response, I would hate to deprive him and the House of delivering it.


When questions of an open character are tabled, the Office looks around the horizon — from a West Tyrone perspective, in this case — to ensure that there are answers for likely questions. In this case we are similarly positioned. I have been informed by the IDB that it takes a keen interest in these issues, and 14 of the 16 inward investment projects initiated during 2000-01 were in New TSN areas.
Since April 1999, the IDB has introduced 36 potential investors to West Tyrone, and it has secured new inward investment courtesy of a £1·2 million project by Fabplus. The company will manufacture sprinkler systems in Strabane creating 30 jobs. I am sure the Member is familiar with the project. The Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment is focused on that, and it is one of its principal concerns.


Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I am pleased to be associated with the First Minister’s rejection of the hollow claims made by the DUP. When the First and Deputy First Minister consider a visit to West Tyrone, will they seriously consider visiting Castlederg, which has a tense community relations problem that we are endeavouring to resolve? I feel that a visit from the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister would go some way to helping to resolve that tension.


I am familiar with Castlederg, having been there on several occasions. I am aware that, during the course of the troubles, the village of Castlederg has experienced a significant number of fatalities — of murders. I suspect that if that were calculated on a per capita of the population basis, Castlederg would emerge as one of the worst affected parts of Northern Ireland.
Against that background, I am not surprised that there are some feelings and tensions in the area. It is our hope that those tensions will be ameliorated as we see progress towards establishing a commitment to exclusively peaceful and democratic means, through the continued operation and success of this institution. In the long run, that holds the best hope for the entire community, including the people of Castlederg. We shall consider the matter that the Member has mentioned.


Further to that, I invite the Minister — [Interruption].


This is an opportunity for the Member to put question 3, which stands in his name.

Irish Honours System

3. asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister if it will consult with President Mary McAleese on an honours system that would be appropriate and fitting for Irish nationally- minded citizens.
(AQO843/01)


We have no plans to consult President McAleese on that issue.


I wish to record my great disappointment that the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister has consistently underplayed the North/South element of the Good Friday Agreement. I ask the Minister to work with President McAleese to ensure that the profile of the President’s Award — the challenge to the young people of Ireland between the ages of 15 and 25 — is increased in the North, because the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister is not doing anything to ameliorate the cold house for Nationalists in the North.


I reject any allegation that the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister is in any way undercommitted to North/South arrangements. On previous occasions, we have answered questions on the institutional format, and we have made it clear that we are committed to ensuring that the North/South arrangements work in a full and effective way across a range of issues. Those include looking at — as we did in the institutional format — extending areas that would come under formal co-operation and, therefore, the accountability mechanisms that attach to the North/South Ministerial Council. To develop matters in those ways hardly implies a lack of commitment.
The Irish Government have considered the matter of honours on several occasions, going back to 1930. It has always been felt that any honours system could be introduced only on a cross-party basis. It has been the subject of discussion in the Dáil, including during the current session, and the matter is one that the Government and other parties are addressing. An honours system, as such, is not a matter for the President, and I hope that the Member recognises the significance of article 40 of the Constitution of Ireland, because I certainly do.
With respect to any other issues, our Office remains open, positive and encouraging to anyone interested in promoting activities in, or participation from, Northern Ireland.


I am speaking as an Irish nationally- minded citizen — that is honour enough in itself, and I seek no further reward or award. However, does the Minister agree that there is a place for a system to recognise the efforts of citizens on this island — their efforts to improve the quality of life and to create an egalitarian society — but that in the past some of those honours and award systems have been abused, and have been used solely to award the great and the good and the rich and the powerful? Any future system should recognise that even modest efforts by people throughout society provide a rich and powerful contribution to the cause of peace, prosperity and stability in the country.


The Republican and socialist tradition has been to oppose any system that might extend privilege or patronage. However, many people realise that it is appropriate to find ways to recognise contributions made to society. Many countries, including republics, have systems that recognise citizens’ outstanding contributions and dedication.
Should the Irish Government introduce a system to recognise and reflect such contributions, many in the House and elsewhere would be happy to welcome that move. From another perspective, many people appreciate honours that are conferred differently.


Will the Minister take note of how many Irish nationally-minded citizens have been honoured by Her Majesty the Queen recently and have been glad to receive her honour?


Order.


I have no problem in noting that people have received honours under the British honour system, be they Nationalist-minded or Unionist-minded. They are entitled to accept or decline any honour offered to or conferred on them.

Executive Business

4. asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister to make a statement on business transacted at the previous meeting of the Executive.
(AQO833/01)


The previous Executive meeting was held on 14 February 2002, and a copy of the press release issued following the meeting has been placed in the Assembly Library.


I note the terse way in which the First Minister answered that question, given that a fortnight ago Mr Haughey refused to give any indication of business to be tabled for the next Executive meeting. I suppose the fact that the Executive have announced that a press release has been made available is something for which to be grateful.
Is the First Minister aware that anyone who can read English or Welsh can access the National Assembly for Wales web site and print out minutes of its Cabinet meetings? On 19 June 2001, in answer to a supplementary to my question about freedom of information, the then Deputy First Minister advised the Assembly that
"We are currently considering the most appropriate date to implement the Freedom of Information Act 2000 in the devolved Administration." — [Official Report, Bound Volume 11, Page 221].
Will the Minister advise the House when something is going to be done about freedom of information and stop muttering platitudes?


I am happy to inform the Member that Northern Ireland will be included in the UK freedom of information legislation, and it will be implemented here. On Mr Ford’s general point, there is a need for confidentiality with regard to discussions in the Executive. The discussions regularly refer to policy issues, which would not be appropriate to publish.


Will the Minister comment on the Welsh situation?


I cannot comment on the discussions in Wales. Wales is an entirely different case as the extent of devolution is narrower there. It would be more to the point if a similar practice obtained in Cabinet discussions in London, Scotland or Dublin. That is not the case. The Member’s question is misconceived.


In order to throw more light on the matter, can the First Minister outline the major issues that have come before the Executive since he and Mr Durkan took office in November?


Several major issues have come before us during recent weeks and months, and those are mainly in the public domain. One matter was mentioned in the rather terse press release that was issued last Thursday, which said that
"Ministers discussed … the forthcoming spending review."
It is difficult to conceive of an issue of greater importance to the Assembly and all the Departments. The spending review 2002, which will culminate in whatever decisions the Chancellor makes in the summer, is crucial. The Assembly would regard the Executive as highly remiss if they did not consider the matter, the approaches that they will make and the preparations for it. Moreover, the Assembly would regard the Executive as extremely foolish if they were to consider those matters in the full glare of publicity.


Will the First Minister tell us whether the Executive, having met on 14 February, two days after the Secretary of State called for Sinn Féin to join the Northern Ireland Policing Board, discussed the aforementioned issue? Does he agree that the absence of Sinn Féin from the Policing Board has enabled discussions to proceed without the poison that that party normally injects into public bodies, which makes it hard to reach resolutions on difficult issues? Will he tell the House whether he agrees with the call from the Irish Prime Minister that further concessions should be given to Sinn Féin to entice its members on to the Policing Board?


I am not sure if the Member’s last point is accurate, but I dare say he would not allow the detail of what was or was not said to interfere with his comments.
Of course the Policing Board was not discussed at the Executive’s meeting. The Executive discuss Executive business, which relates primarily to matters that are devolved to the Assembly. As the Member mentioned the matter, I am sure that, like most people in Northern Ireland, he is pleased both with the way in which the Policing Board has operated so far and with the broad party consensus that exists on it among the Member’s party, the SDLP and my party. We all congratulate the DUP on the positive role that it has played and lament the fact that it has not been equally positive elsewhere.

Use of Executive Office in Brussels

5. asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister how it intends to utilise the Executive Office in Brussels to assist Assembly Members and Statutory Committees in their business.
(AQO834/01)


The new office in Brussels is a valuable resource, not only for the Executive but for Northern Ireland as a whole, and its facilities should be available to a broad range of interests. Specifically, the Brussels office will assist Assembly Committees in conducting inquiries that have a European dimension.
To date, the Committee for Enterprise Trade and Investment, the Committee of the Centre and the Committee for Regional Development have used the office during visits to Brussels. Officials based in the office assisted those Committees by arranging meetings with relevant contacts in Brussels and by providing advice on the organisation of the visits. The Committee for Finance and Personnel has approached the office about a further visit in the spring, and the Brussels office will welcome any other Statutory Committee that wishes to visit. The office will also assist Committees by providing factual information on request about European Union institutions, procedures, policies and laws. Individual Members who visit Brussels may wish to contact the office for advice and information about the facilities available.


It is good to see that so many Committees have been using the office. Are there any plans for the Agriculture Committee to use it? We all know how important agriculture is to the Province, and I would welcome the Committee’s having an opportunity to use the office.


I mentioned the Committees that have already been in contact with the office. They have either already used it or are planning to do so. The Committee for Agriculture and Rural Development was not one of those that I mentioned. The Committee must determine whether it wants to visit Brussels, and, if so, whether it wants to avail itself of the useful facilities that the office provides.


In the run-up to the establishment of the office in Brussels did the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister have any contact with the Northern Ireland Centre in Europe? I understand that it did not. If that and various other reports on the office are examples of its networking abilities, it could become a costly and futile initiative.


The Northern Ireland Centre in Europe ceased to operate in Brussels some time ago, which I regret. It would have been helpful to see a more seemly transition between the arrangements that the Northern Ireland Centre in Europe was providing and the current arrangements through the Office of the Northern Ireland Executive in Brussels.
We now need to progress on that basis, to maximise the potential benefits of the Office of the Northern Ireland Executive in Europe and also to maximise the effectiveness of our dealings with European issues here. The Executive and a range of Departments are dealing with European issues in a detailed and technical manner, and we must also involve other local groups and interests. The Northern Ireland Centre in Europe can contribute to that.


I regret that some Members were unable to put further questions today, owing to a particularly large number of questions, including supplementary questions. The time for questions to the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister is up.

Culture, arts and leisure

There will now be questions to the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure. I remind the House that question No 1, in the name of Mrs Nelis, has been withdrawn. She cannot be present today as her husband has experienced an accident.

Cultural Heritage of East Belfast

2. asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure what steps have been taken by his Department to preserve and protect the cultural heritage of East Belfast.
(AQO829/01)
(Mr Deputy Speaker [Mr McClelland] in the Chair)


I want to begin by acknowledging the rich and diverse range of cultural heritage in East Belfast such as its world-famous shipbuilding heritage, HMS Caroline, Craigavon House, and the great writer CS Lewis — to name but a few. The preservation and protection of the area’s cultural heritage are matters for bodies from both the public and independent sectors. The Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure’s primary role is to provide jointly, with the Department of the Environment, the strategic framework for the preservation of the cultural heritage of the whole of Northern Ireland. At a local level, the cultural forum that my Department established to bring together a range of relevant public bodies has already provided direct assistance to district councils preparing cultural strategies in the context of local integrated plans.


Order. It is difficult to hear the Minister over the conversations that are taking place in the Chamber.


The Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure is working with the National Museums and Galleries of Northern Ireland and Belfast Industrial Heritage, among others, to preserve and promote East Belfast’s unique industrial heritage through the creation of a museum of sea and sky. The Titanic will be one of the key themes. The Department of the Environment has already listed some of the historic buildings and dock installations in the area known as Titanic Quarter. I hope that East Belfast will play a full role in the Imagine Belfast bid for the city to be named European City of Culture 2008, which has received significant funding from my Department. The competition closes next month, and Belfast has a strong case.


I thank the Minister for his comprehensive reply. However, is he aware of public concern over the disposal of Ormiston House, the home of Viscount William James Pirrie, who built the Titanic, of Little Lea, the boyhood home of CS Lewis, and of Cabin Hill, where the first Northern Ireland Cabinet met? Is he fully aware of the proposed development of the Cherryvalley nursery, which threatens the whole river corridor in that historic area? Will he bring his considerable influence to bear on the requisite authorities to ensure that public concerns on those issues are finally allayed?


I am aware of some of those issues. However, preservation of historic buildings, such as Ormiston House and Cabin Hill, is outside my remit. Those are listed buildings under the Environment and Heritage Service, which is a section of the Department of the Environment. Protection of those buildings would therefore be its responsibility.
My Department could, however, become involved in the future use of those houses in a heritage role, it that were proposed. As things stand, the matters that the Member mentioned are primarily for the Department of the Environment, the Planning Service and the Environment and Heritage Service.

River Bush Salmon Stocks

3. asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure what action he is taking to increase salmon stocks in the River Bush.
(AQO851/01)


The Department has been aware for some time of concerns over the decreased number of salmon returning to the river as a result of the reduction in the numbers of adult fish returning to spawn in the river. That reflects a general trend of falling stocks across the north Atlantic.
Several measures have been pursued in the last few years to increase stocks, and more are planned this year. First, the river will be stocked annually with hatchery- reared smolts. Those ranch salmon provide good angling on the lower stretches of the river, although they are not allowed to migrate upstream to spawn, as they may detrimentally affect the international salmon research project that is being undertaken on the river.
Secondly, a programme of increased in-river stocking with hatchery-reared salmon fry and parr is scheduled to commence in spring 2002. That will yield increased numbers of smolts going to sea, which should increase the number of adult fish returning to the river.
Thirdly, the marine survival of salmon is a major concern. To help to address that locally, I recently obtained £1·5 million from the Executive programme fund for a voluntary scheme to buy out coastal commercial salmon netting entitlements. That should increase the number of adult fish returning to Northern Ireland river systems, including the River Bush.
Finally, a river warden has been recruited specifically for the River Bush to tackle poaching problems and to assist in upgrading habitat to provide additional spawning opportunities for returning fish. Those measures show that the Department is implementing major measures to increase stocks in the River Bush.


Are the interests of tourism, the River Bush or anglers served by scientists continuing to develop fin clip numbers between Bushmills hatchery and the river mouth, whilst continuing to neglect the restocking of the river to any significant degree by introducing wild salmon fry?
In 1983-84, wild salmon stocks in the River Bush were at a record low. Could the actions that were taken to correct the situation then be employed now, as stocks are at an all-time low, just as they were in 1983?


Although I do not have the exact figures for 1983, I know that stocks, particularly wild salmon, are declining. Several measures are in place to try to address that, of which buying up nets is one. The continuous angling development programme, which follows on from the salmon enhancement programme, is designed specifically to carry out improvements in the habitat. The salmon management plan, a scientific programme that sets spawning targets in the catchment area to ensure that the spawning levels are maintained, is a further relevant measure. There are also restrictions on exploitation.
Bag limits have been introduced. From 1 June 2002 until the end of the season, a limit of two fish a day will be permitted. Prior to that, all fish caught will be returned. I mentioned the role of the warden on the river. There is also the River Bush project, which is an internationally- renowned scientific project to examie the marine survival of salmon. The River Bush is used as an index river in that project. A great deal of work is ongoing.
Those measures are designed to address a combination of factors, which means that wild salmon stocks are reducing. It is estimated that they have reduced by around 50%. That fills us with concern, and we want to address the matter. However, the unknown factor of the ability of salmon to survive in the north Atlantic is outside our control. Evidence suggests that matters such as temperature increases and pollution are also having a seriously adverse effect.


I welcome the Minister’s initiative to support the salmon population. He will be aware that a slurry or silage effluent spill can undo much good work with one blow. Several technological advances have been made in the reprocessing of farm waste. Would the Minister’s Department support initiatives advanced by the farming community to introduce some of those methods in Northern Ireland?


The short answer is yes. It is no secret that pollution presents a major problem, not only in the numbers of fish that are killed but in the damage that it causes to the habitat. The Department would support all reasonable measures proposed by the farming industry or by any sector to deal with slurry waste entering and polluting the river systems.
On a positive note, no fish were killed in the River Bush last year. However, as Mr Leslie is aware, other rivers were not so fortunate.

Darts

4. asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure, pursuant to AQO 399/00 and AQO 420/01, to give an update on plans by the NI Sports Council to recognise darts as a sport.
(AQO848/01)


The Sports Council’s officers’ recognition panel met on 3 December 2001 and reaffirmed previous decisions that darts is not an activity that they wish to formally recognise as a sport. I refer the Member to the answer given to AQO 420/01 on 26 November 2001, and repeat that darts has not so far been recognised as a sport, on the grounds that it involves insufficient physical activity. Recognition per se would not lead to funding; it would simply allow access to funding. In the circumstances, I suggest that funding by sponsorship should be pursued.


Through you, Mr Deputy Speaker, and in the immortal words of John McEnroe "you cannot be serious". The Minister rightly defined sport as "all forms of physical activity". Does he not agree that darts, insofar as it concerns the body as opposed to the mind or the spirit, relates to throwing, which is a physical exercise. In some games a ball is thrown; a punch is thrown in boxing, and those are recognised sports. Dart players throw darts. Should the Minister not take up this discriminatory ruling and pursue it with the full vigour of his office to ensure that those who participate in the worthy sport of darts — tens of thousands of players in Northern Ireland — get the recognition that they duly deserve? In so doing, he might request action —


Mr Close, you come very close to making a speech.


My earlier question referred to equality and discrimination. Surely to goodness the Minister would not wish to see action taken through the equality Bill?


It is not the first time that the Assembly has heard Mr Close’s impassioned plea on behalf of darts. I could throw "You cannot be serious" back to him.


Would that be a physical throw?


Or a rhetorical one, whichever Mr Close wishes. I appreciate the case that he makes, but it is out of my hands. The sports councils of Northern Ireland, England, Scotland and Wales come together and determine whether a sport is recognised. They have met several times to discuss the issue of darts, and each time, darts has been recognised as a game, a pastime or a hobby — but not as a sport. The game is played in any pub in the land and it is enjoyed by many. However, the central thrust seems to be that a sport has access to lottery funding. I reiterate that an activity’s recognition as a sport does not guarantee its funding. There are other criteria, not least of which are sporting priorities.
However, there are other avenues of funding to pursue. It would be wrong of me to ask the Sports Council to skew the criteria that it uses to define a sport — that is to say as a sufficient physical activity — in order to allow darts access to another funding stream. Sponsorship from brewery companies is a ready source of funding.

Tobacco Advertising and Sponsorship in Motorcycling

5. asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure to outline (a) his policy on the use of tobacco advertising and sponsorship in motorcycling; and (b) any discussions he has had with the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety on the issue.
(AQO849/01)


Ideally, I would like tobacco advertising and sponsorship of motorcycling to be eliminated. However, I recognise that the sport needs that advertising and sponsorship to survive. Unfortunately, alternative sponsorship is rare, and that is why motorcycle sport continues to rely almost exclusively on tobacco sponsorship.
Responsibility for any decision to ban or restrict tobacco advertising and sponsorship in sport lies with the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety. Although I have not had any discussions with Minister de Brún, I know that a private Member’s Bill that will extend to Northern Ireland is moving through the legislative process.


The Minister’s acceptance of tobacco sponsorship and his dealings with the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety disappoint me. I specifically mentioned motorcycling because of that sport’s recent acceptance of sponsorship from the tobacco industry. My concern applies to all sports that accept sponsorship from that source.
Does the Minister agree that, in view of the 3,000- plus deaths in Northern Ireland from tobacco-related illnesses and the enormous unnecessary costs to the Health Service — [Interruption].


There is a good deal of background conversation, which makes it difficult for me to hear the Member. I remind Members that, if they wish to hold a prolonged conversation, there are many other rooms in the Building.


Does the Minister agree that, in view of the 3,000-plus smoking-related deaths in Northern Ireland and the enormous unnecessary cost to the Health Service, his Department should take remedial measures to stop the promotion of tobacco and other health-damaging products during sporting activities?


Tobacco sponsorship has all but disappeared, and motorcycling is the last sport to avail of it. I would support a ban on tobacco advertising, provided that there were some lead-in time to allow the sport to seek alternative funding. As things stand, if a ban were introduced tomorrow, that would have a major effect on motorbike racing; for example, short- circuit motorbike racing would face great difficulties and could disappear.
The Westminster Government introduced a Bill to ban all tobacco advertisement and sponsorship by July 2003. That Bill was overtaken by the general election. However, the private Member’s Bill, which replicates the Government’s Bill, is working its way through Westminster. It will set a deadline of October 2006 for the ban of all tobacco advertising.
The Government’s original Bill had derogations for snooker and Formula 1 racing. We do not have Formula 1 racing in Northern Ireland, and little snooker is played. The private Member’s Bill would end the derogations. Therefore, the Member has referred to a process that is already under way and that may take care of the problem that he identified. If it does not, the issue can be debated again in the House. However, it is a matter for central legislation. It is important to have a standardised means of addressing such issues in the United Kingdom.
I would support — and I doubt whether anyone in the House would oppose — such a ban.


I have been a reformed smoker for some 20 years. Does the Minister agree that cigarette sponsorship of any sport undermines the campaign to improve the health of our citizens? Will he ensure that the Westminster legislation is relayed to the Assembly so that it can lend its support to that initiative?


I am happy to circulate the details of the proposed legislation to Members.

European Football Championship 2008

6. asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure to detail any discussions he has had with his counterparts in Scotland and the Republic of Ireland regarding a joint bid to host the European football championship in 2008.
(AQO850/01)


There has been no formal contact with either Scotland or the Republic of Ireland at ministerial level on this issue. This is a matter for the football authorities concerned, and the Irish Football Association (IFA) has consistently indicated that it has no plans to seek involvement in a joint bid because of the lack of suitable facilities. Given those circumstances, it would have been inappropriate for me to intervene.
The establishment of a national stadium is a key issue that is central to such a bid and to the development of a soccer strategy in Northern Ireland. Following the end of the strategy’s consultation period on 31 January, I will consider the issue more closely with the other sports that may be involved.


It is disappointing that nothing is happening at this stage. Does the 2008 championship not represent what is possibly the last opportunity to get a national stadium under way in Northern Ireland? Given the affection that Members on the Minister’s side of the House have for Scotland, and the affection that Members on the other side of the House have for the Republic — although some follow Glasgow Celtic — is it not time that we made the most of the opportunity to join with the bid that is being submitted by the two other football associations?


First, I do not regard this as the last chance to establish a national stadium. It would not be right to expend considerable sums of money and resources that we do not have simply to race to join in with a soccer tournament. The IFA is football’s governing body, and this matter is its responsibility. The Scottish Football Association (SFA) approached the IFA, which stated that it was unable to make a joint bid because it did not have the adequate facilities.
The criteria for the bid must also be considered. Eight stadiums, each with 30,000 seats, are required. Scotland would provide six stadiums; it already has four stadiums and it will upgrade a further two. The Irish Republic, which is joining the bid, would provide two stadiums. The last date for joining the bid is the end of February, so the timescale has been too tight. In addition to that, while I do not wish the bid to fail, there is no guarantee that the joint bid by Scotland and the Irish Republic will succeed in 2008. They face stiff competition.
This opportunity will arise every four years. We will become better informed as to how to make progress through the process of considering the establishment of stadiums, the soccer strategy, and the needs of other sports, whose strategies will help us to determine their needs. A substantial investment would be needed. A brand-new 30,000-seater stadium would cost some £60 million. The cost of land and site works, and running costs of about £2 million a year would be added to that. The refurbishment of the existing Windsor Park and support for other existing stadiums would be a much cheaper option.
We must ask the sports involved whether this is how they would want us to spend £60 million. Refurbishment seems to be the best way to achieve such facilities at the lowest cost, while dealing with the needs of the sports involved. This matter involves football, but it also concerns rugby, Gaelic football and athletics. Those sports’ long-term needs must also be addressed.


The Minister’s answer was so thorough that I will have to change my supplementary question. In the light of the difficulties that the Department is facing, and as a goodwill gesture, will the Minister consider inviting the increasingly successful Republic of Ireland World Cup team on a courtesy visit to Northern Ireland to promote some of the work that we are trying to achieve through the soccer strategy?


Such invitations are a matter for the Irish Football Association (IFA), but I will certainly take the suggestion on board and will discuss that matter with the IFA. The IFA is constantly looking for international teams to visit Belfast. The facilities at Windsor Park preclude some teams from playing here, but the hosting of major international matches at Windsor Park is the best and surest way to ensure that the Northern Ireland team reaches the required standard to take part in the next Union of European Football Associations (UEFA) European championships in 2004.


Can the Minister confirm that last week a spokesman for the IFA gave a frosty reception to any suggestion of involving the IFA? Can he also confirm that UEFA’s rules clearly state that it will not accept a bid from more than two countries?


I am not aware of any such statement from the IFA. However, I can confirm that the IFA indicated to the Scottish Football Association that an expression of interest would be forthcoming, but that the IFA was not able to go forward because it considered the prospect of participating in a joint bid to be impractical due to the lack of appropriate facilities. If my understanding of the situation is wrong, I will try to find out more and write to the Member on the matter.
I do not believe that there is any limit on the number of partners in a bid. There can be more than two — in fact, UEFA was looking for partnership bids rather than single-country bids. I understand that one of the strongest bids being put forward for the 2004 rounds comes from Scandinavia, which includes Denmark, Sweden and Norway in a joint bid.


Does the Minister agree that Windsor Park can continue to be the national stadium, and that the soccer strategy that is being presented for consideration by the Committee for Culture, Arts and Leisure and the Department should be in place before any new national stadium goes ahead?


I agree. The football and Gaelic sports strategies are being finalised, and we must also examine the strategies for rugby, athletics and other interested sports. There is no reason to rule out the redevelopment of Windsor Park. The resource implications of such matters must be considered, and it is a question of whether it will be more cost-effective to invest in the refurbishment of existing facilities to bring them up to the required standard or to build new facilities — I have given you a flavour of the amount of money that that will involve. The redevelopment of existing sites will probably be a much cheaper option, but that matter will be finalised later.

Townland Names

7. asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure if he has any plans to include townland names on all correspondence emanating from his Department.
(AQO845/01)


My officials are encouraged to reply to correspondence using the address supplied by the correspondent. Townland names are a valuable element of our rich cultural and linguistic heritage; and I welcome their use in addresses, along with the postcode and, where appropriate, the road name. My Department is also taking specific steps to protect and promote the important cultural and linguistic heritage preserved in our townlands.


I thank the Minister for his commitment to the promotion of townland names. Does he agree that it is reasonable to expect the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure to take the lead in a major campaign aimed at promoting townland names? Will the Department incorporate in all official correspondence the name of the townland in which its headquarters at Interpoint is located?


My Department is taking significant steps to safeguard and strengthen that aspect of our cultural and linguistic heritage.
One example is the common address file — an initiative from the Ordnance Survey of Northern Ireland, which is part of the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure. It is looking at a standardised form of address for Government and the private sector, which will include townland names. We have received a successful bid for £1 million of funding through Executive programme funds to advance that scheme, which will mean that every address will be re-united with its townland name. That will happen; the next step is to collect the address data. It is important to recognise that townland names have never disappeared — they are detailed on ordnance survey maps, depending on the size of the map. The common address file will ensure that townland names are on standardised forms of addresses in future.


Does the Minister agree that one of the greatest obstacles to the retention of our townland names is the Post Office policy of giving preference to road names, a policy which is driven by the interests of big business and its narrow, selfish interests? Will his Department use its influence to have the Post Office change its policy, and take on board the concerns of local communities?


I must ask you to be brief, Minister.


I readily agree that the introduction of road names by the Post Office was the biggest threat to the common usage of townland names, but I do not agree that it was to do with big business. As I said in my answer to Mr McElduff, a standardised form of address, including townland names, is coming on board through the common address file in the near future.

Agriculture and Rural Development
BSE-Contaminated Tissue

1. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development to confirm that all possible measures have been taken to prevent BSE-contaminated tissue from entering the food chain; and to make a statement.
(AQO852/01)


Members will be aware that no bovine animal of more than 30 months of age enters the human food chain. Regarding animals under 30 months of age, which pass both anti- and post-mortem examinations, all tissues that could potentially be infected with the BSE agent are removed. The Specified Risk Material Regulations (Northern Ireland) 1997, as amended, requires that all bovine tissues — otherwise known as specified risk material — that could potentially harbour the BSE agent are removed as soon as is reasonably practicable after the slaughter of the animal, immediately stained blue, and disposed off by rendering or by incineration at approved premises. All carcasses for human consumption, including imported carcasses, are inspected by departmental staff to ensure that all specified risk material has been removed.
The Department and the Food Standards Agency place a high emphasis on the controls in this area of work. We regularly carry out audits in meat plants to ensure that all best practices are being followed. The results of those audits, which are published monthly in the UK BSE bulletin, give us a high level of confidence that specified risk material is being properly disposed of and is unable to enter the food chain.


I thank the Minister for her comprehensive answer. Does she agree that maximum consumer confidence in food safety standards must be the priority, both in food production and distribution? What other measures might be in place to protect the consumer?


I fully recognise the importance of consumer confidence to the agrifood industry. However, we cannot expect to gain that confidence without securing the safety of our food. As far as beef is concerned, no bovine animal of more than 30 months of age is permitted to enter the human food chain. That measure ensures that cattle that show no sign of BSE, but which may be incubating the disease, cannot enter the food chain. In addition, all specified risk material — brain, spinal cord, et cetera — is removed from all bovine carcasses. The over-30-month scheme exists to ensure the safe removal of all parts of bovines of more than 30 months of age from the food chain, in case of early incubation.

Rural Development Programme: EU Moneys

2. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development how the EU moneys redirected to the rural development programme’s "modulation money" will be spent, and who will benefit.
(AQO863/01)


As required under EU Council regulation 1259/99, funds raised by the application of modulation can be deployed only for the purposes of agrienvironment, forestation of our agriculture land, farmer early retirement or less-favoured area (LFA) support measures. There is also a requirement that expenditure of those moneys must be confined to new recipients or schemes. Therefore, in the Northern Ireland rural development regulation plan, modulation funds have been devoted entirely to agrienvironmental measures and grants for the forestation of agriculture land. The beneficiaries are landowners or farmers with a long-term lease.
Some of the projected receipts for modulation have yet to be allocated under the rural development regulation plan, but current EU rules dictate that farmers and landowners will receive those moneys too.


Can a region decide what the money will be used for? Very few farmers have entered the countryside management scheme, because they do not see themselves simply as images for tourism through managing the hedgerows. The Department of Agriculture and Rural Development has devoted many staff and a great deal of administration costs to the scheme. What direct benefit will result for farmers who are deprived now?


Regions can decide within the confines of the allowed measures, to which I have already referred. They are forestation, the early retirement scheme, agrienvironment measures and area support measures as well as the non-accompanying measures, which are allowed for match funding. However, it can be done on a regional basis within those parameters.
As I have already stated, all of the money goes to the farmers. Europe is looking towards the environment and moving to the second pillar of the common agricultural policy (CAP), which largely relates to diversification projects and the environment. It would be foolish for people to put their heads in the sand. The Department has taken great care to ensure that farmers are trained, informed and in a position to benefit from those agrienvironment measures, including countryside management, and I am pleased to confirm uptake for those schemes.

Dairy Farmers

3. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development what actions she has taken to alleviate the serious problems faced by dairy farmers who have suffered low refunds from the EU on dairy products.
(AQO826/01)


The purpose of export refunds is to encourage exports by compensating processors of dairy products for the higher cost of using EU-sourced raw materials under the common agricultural policy.
When world dairy commodity markets declined in 2001, my officials and I worked hard to secure increases at the EU Milk and Milk Products Management Committee meetings. I also raised the matter with Margaret Beckett, the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. I impressed on her the need to put pressure on the EU Commission to secure an increase in export refunds. Moreover, in advance of the crucial EU Management Committee meeting on 24 January, I ensured that Commissioner Fischler was made aware of the importance of that matter for Northern Ireland.
Export refunds for skimmed milk powder have increased from zero on 1 November 2001 to 300 euro a ton at present. I shall continue to review the market situation in conjunction with the dairy industry.


I thank the Minister for her response. Does she agree that the move, although welcome as a step in the right direction, is still not enough to alleviate the serious situation that is developing in Northern Ireland’s dairy farming sector? Does she agree that a further rise is needed at the Committee’s next meeting? Does the Minister accept that the dairy farming industry in Northern Ireland, which generates upwards of £600 million a year and a further £70 million in VAT for the local economy, as well as employing approximately 13,000 people, deserves to receive better treatment from the EU and better export refunds for their products?


At the United Dairy Farmer’s milk auction last week, I noted that there have been further falls in prices. The indications from the dairy industry are that the fall in prices would have been more severe if we had not secured increases in the export refunds. However, it is disappointing that those have not had a more positive impact on the market. I agree with the Member that it would be useful if we could get additional funding. I have asked my officials to review the market information with the industry, with a view to pressing for further increases in export refunds at future meetings of the EU Milk and Milk Products Management Committee.
I have also supported measures to help to strengthen the market. For example, private storage aid for butterfat was brought forward by two weeks at the beginning at March. That is the first time that that has happened for 10 years. Furthermore, the minimum incorporation rate for subsidised skimmed milk powder used in animal feed increased to 50% on 1 January. Both of those measures have been helpful.


Does the Minister agree that to achieve improved export refunds for Northern Ireland’s dairy sector, we need enthusiastic support from Margaret Beckett, the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs? Is enthusiastic support forthcoming?


As I have already stated, I made clear to Mrs Beckett the position in Northern Ireland at the ministerial meeting before the previous Management Committee meeting. I made the case strongly to her on behalf of the Northern Ireland industry. I am pleased to say that Mrs Beckett took it fully on board. At the Management Committee, the case for Northern Ireland was advanced by Mrs Beckett. She was supportive in that situation. That is how we managed to get the previous rise. I may have to press for another rise in the future if the situation deteriorates, but I shall do that in discussion with the industry and by talking again to Mrs Beckett.

Vision Document

4. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development how many responses have been received to the consultation process on the vision document; and to make a statement.
(AQO856/01)


A total of 81 written responses was received by the closing date for consultation. I have been most encouraged by the response to the consultation exercise. The conference in November was well attended, and I have held 27 bilateral meetings with key industry stakeholders. My Department is currently engaged in analysing the vision report and the responses to it.


I too welcome the numbers of responses to the vision report. What is the timescale for the implementation of that report?


I shall need time to consider the report and the results of the consultation exercise. I shall also require time to have discussions with my Executive Colleagues, other Departments and the Committee for Agriculture and Rural Development. I aim to produce an action plan in the summer. However, some recommendations that have widespread support and that are affordable within existing provision may be implemented earlier. For example, we may be able to move on areas such as information technology and communications technology; training; animal and plant health; agrifood and the supply chain; the environment; representation of the interests of Northern Ireland; and the food body, before we come to the action plan areas in which we are already engaged.

Milk Prices

5. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development what her assessment is on the effect that milk quota transferred from the UK is having on the current milk prices in Northern Ireland.
(AQO827/01)


The transfer of wholesale milk quota between regions of the United Kingdom has been permissible only since 1 April 1993. In the interim, Northern Ireland has benefited from the revised arrangements, with the net quota transferred to Northern Ireland each year ranging between 13 million and 63 million litres. That has helped to improve the structure of dairy farms in Northern Ireland. It has not had any adverse impact on the prices paid to producers for their milk.
A reduction in the prices received by producers in recent years has stemmed first from the strength of sterling, which has been acknowledged by the payment of agrimonetary compensation to dairy farmers in 2000 and again in 2001.
The sector has recently faced a weakening of the international markets on which the Northern Ireland industry relies heavily, and there have also been reductions in export refunds. My officials and I have been working hard to secure an increase in export refunds in the hope that that will improve prices paid to consumers.


I thank the Minister for the depth of her reply. Would dairy farmers be better off if they had not purchased milk quota from GB?


Farmers who decided to purchase milk quota did so to help improve the structure of their farm business and farm income from the point of view of scale. Had they not done so, their businesses would not have remained viable. The additional quota has also benefited the milk-processing sector by maintaining and generating employment, and by enabling the sector to use its assets more efficiently. On the whole it has been beneficial, and we are not any worse off for having the additional milk quota.

Twenty-Day Livestock Movement Standstill

6. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development when she expects to relax the 20-day livestock movement standstill.
(AQO828/01)


I draw the Member’s attention to the changes that I have made, which became effective from 4 February 2002. The holding standstill no longer applies to cattle and pigs — and moved-in cattle and pigs will be subject to a 30-day standstill. Other cattle and pigs in the herd will no longer be subjected to a standstill period. The current 20-day standstill period for sheep will continue to apply to the entire holding.
Although I am content with veterinary advice that the risk of disease in cattle and pigs in Northern Ireland is now low, it would be prudent to maintain existing foot-and-mouth disease controls on sheep until after the stress of lambing, when the position will be reviewed.


Does the Minister agree that the 30-day standstill period on individual animals currently in place could be lower and would still have the effect of reducing the number of notifiable disease cases? It could also reduce the number of tuberculosis and brucellosis cases in Northern Ireland. That would reduce the amount of compensation paid, and would also make the Northern Ireland farmer more health conscious.


The 30-day standstill period for the movement of cattle and pigs reflects the residency period for intracommunity trade. It is necessary to reflect the shared desire in Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland to control the spread of a range of animal diseases. Some animal diseases — unlike foot-and- mouth disease — have a 30-day incubation period. That is the reason for the 30-day standstill requirement.

Value-Added Dairy Products

7. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development how she is encouraging the development of value-added dairy products in Northern Ireland.
(AQO855/01)


Although the Northern Ireland dairy industry makes an important contribution to the agrifood industry, it is heavily reliant on the export of dairy products. Therefore, in order to enhance future prosperity, it is vital that the industry focuses on the development of high value-added dairy products. To this end my Department has supported several projects under the EU processing and marketing grant scheme to develop high value-added products.
Food technologists from Loughry College continue to work with a wide range of processing businesses in the dairy sector to identify and take advantage of niche market and other market opportunities through the development of new milk drinks, cheeses and cream products. Specialist training is provided to those engaged in the development of value-added products, and scientific research is also carried out with industry groups.


Does the Minister acknowledge that, during the period of direct rule, the Northern Ireland Office was, to a degree, negligent in its failure to address the overreliance of the milk sector, on milk powder in particular? Does she agree that, although intervention and funding from the state can play a role in the short term, developing value-added products with alternative uses, which will increase dairy farmers incomes, will be vital in the long term?


I do not wish to comment on the period of direct rule. I had no responsibility for that, and it is a matter of opinion. There is now a need to restructure the industry and to take whatever steps we can to assist it, including processing and marketing grants that help develop those products. The industry accepts the need for structural change in the long term, with more emphasis being placed on value-added products, and possibly some rationalisation, in order to build economies of scale.
Although public money cannot be spent in order to achieve rationalisation, assistance can be made available to support investment in value-added production. That is an area on which we are already focusing, and on which we shall continue to focus.


Does the Minister agree that the setting up of co-operatives is one way to encourage the development of value-added products? Is that provided for in her plans for the future of the agrifood industry?


The vision report encourages the coming together of various parts of the food chain to develop horizontal and vertical links. My Department provides financial and technical assistance for the establishment of co-operatives by producers, including those that are intended to help to add value to primary production. I have recently had meetings with one sector of the industry that is attempting to do that. In addition, the mushroom sector has come together in order to achieve better results. I am anxious to assist and enhance any proposal made by the industry, and to facilitate it on the basis of encouraging the co-operation that is proposed in the vision report.

CAP Reform

8. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development what discussions have taken place on CAP reform (a) within Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland; (b) within Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales; and (c) with the British Government; and to make a statement.
(AQO862/01)


I have had several recent discussions on CAP reform in Ireland and Great Britain. In late January, I met Joe Walsh, the Republic’s Minister for Agriculture, Food and Rural Environment, at the North/ South Ministerial Council agriculture sectoral meeting and confirmed with him that our priority should be the protection of the ability to export to Third World countries, and the retention of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) blue box exemptions for direct payments to farmers.
Early last week, I met with my Scottish and Welsh counterparts in Edinburgh. Later in the week, we met the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Margaret Beckett, in London. Those discussions covered our approach to the mid-term review of the Agenda 2000 agreement. My negotiating stance in those discussions is that, although there are valid reasons for reform, we must endeavour to ensure that reform is on a scale and at a pace that does not put unacceptable pressure on farmers and their families, or that causes difficulties for the viability of the rural economy.


In the context of the expansion of the European Union and the consequent pressures that may arise, will the Minister expand further on what she has outlined on reform and related issues? With regard to agriculture, how shall we be affected by the expansion of the European Union?


There are valid arguments for reform, including the competitiveness of European Union products, environmental concerns, the level of stability of farm incomes, budgetary constraints and the "Berlin ceiling", and trade and enlargement considerations. All those elements mean that there will be change. We must be able to manage that change.
We must try to ensure that whatever reform takes place is on a scale and at a pace that does not put unacceptable pressure on farmers, and that it will not cause problems for the viability of the rural economy and rural communities.
There are social and narrow economic issues to be considered. I have been making those points. We want no isolation or marginalisation in rural communities, and we do not wish to create a situation whereby rural communities may "fall off the edge". Due to the nature of our industry and the number of small farms in Northern Ireland, it is extremely important that the pace of change can be absorbed and the farming community can be sustained through it. We must make the important point that change is coming and is inevitable. However, we must manage that change.

Agricultural Subsidies

9. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development whether there has been overpayment of agricultural subsidies in the past year; and to make a statement.
(AQO853/01)


There has been no general overpayment of agricultural subsidies in the past year. Individual cases of overpayment arise when the completion of administrative checks or information from inspections or investigations show that the initial assessment of entitlement, based on the claim made by the farmer, was incorrect. In such cases, the details are entered on the Department’s debtors’ ledger, and in accordance with EU regulations, the Department is obliged to pursue recovery of the overpayment. In the past year, 384 new debt cases amounting to £255,176 were recorded in the Department’s debtors’ ledger. That represents around only two cases per 1,000 claims processed and around 0·14% of the total value of subsidy payments made.


I welcome the Minister’s statement. Will the money be recouped?


There is an obligation on the Department to recoup the money, and it will be recouped in due course.

Meeting with Irish Agriculture Minister

10. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development when she will next meet Mr Joe Walsh TD, Minister for Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, and what issues will be on the agenda.
(AQO860/01)


My next formal meeting with Mr Walsh will be at the North/South Ministerial Council agriculture sectoral meeting, which will take place in April. Our agenda will include items such as animal and plant health research and development, issues of mutual interest linked to CAP reform, WTO negotiations and cross-border rural development. In the interim, I may contact Mr Walsh on an informal basis if issues arise that affect both jurisdictions.


I thank the Minister for her detailed answer. Does she agree that a single island agricultural economy offers the best future prospects for the farming community and industry, North and South?


I thank Mr McElduff for his question. Within the remit of the North/South Ministerial Council there is recognition by Minister Walsh and myself that in many areas — such as animal health — a North/ South all-island strategy could be useful. Regardless of political positions or persuasions, that is recognised across the community as being beneficial to everyone and threatening to no one. There are common agriculture priorities on the island. It makes common sense to work together through the North/South Ministerial Council to co-ordinate our activities and efforts when they can benefit the people of Ireland as a whole.

Good Farming Practice Initiative

11. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development what assessment she has made of the recently launched good farming practice initiative; and to make a statement.
(AQO858/01)


My Department recently launched the Farming Today in the LFA training programme for farmers in less-favoured areas. The programme, which has been designed in partnership with the industry and funded under the Programme for Government, contains two elements — good farming practice and good business sense. Both elements are delivered locally and have a practical workshop style closely linked to the needs of participants. The good farming practice element is designed to help farmers in less-favoured areas meet new environmental obligations that are a condition of LFA and agrienvironment support payments.
Those payments are worth approximately £30 million annually to the local agriculture industry, and failure to follow good farming practice puts the payments at risk. The Farming Today in the LFA programme is now open for business and is attracting considerable interest from the farming community. To date, approximately 3,000 farmers have registered to participate in one or more elements of the training programme.


How is the initiative linked to the rural portal that was recently launched by the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development?


The rural portal is an ICT-based gateway designed to provide farmers with a means to simply and conveniently access information relevant to their business. It was funded under the Programme for Government and is a further example of the investment that we are making to help the industry to meet today’s challenges and to adapt to the needs of the future. Although the good farming practice programme cannot be delivered through the rural portal, it will be used to make information available on both elements of the Farming Today and the LFA training programme. That information will include details of the programme and how farmers can apply to participate.


Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. In relation to the last question —


I am sorry, Mr McHugh, I was calling you for question 15.

Countryside Management Scheme

15. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development to detail (a) the number of applications made to the countryside management scheme; and (b) the number accepted.
(AQO859/01)


Is question 15 the next question? What happened to questions 12, 13 and 14?


The Members are not in the Chamber, so they cannot be called.


I am sorry, Mr Deputy Speaker. I was somewhat confused.
A total of 1,010 applications were received when the countryside management scheme was first opened for applications, of which 280 were subsequently withdrawn or rejected as being ineligible. The finance available allowed 400 applicants to be offered management agreements, and 330 applicants subsequently accepted agreements and entered the scheme. A second round of applications was conducted between May and July 2001, and 1,457 applications were received, including applications from people who were unsuccessful in the first application exercise. Of this total, 356 applications have subsequently been withdrawn or rejected as ineligible —


I reluctantly have to stop the Minister now, because we are past our time.
Motion made:
That the Assembly do now adjourn. — [Mr Deputy Speaker.]

First minister and deputy first minister

Mr Speaker: I shall give advance notice that the first question to the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure will not be taken. Members may be aware that Mrs Nelis’s husband has been seriously injured, and she is unable to attend today.

Single Equality Bill

Mr Seamus Close: 1. asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister if it intends to introduce a "publican’s defence" clause into the single equality Bill.
(AQO831/01)

Mr Roy Beggs: 7. asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister what assessment can it make in relation to the concerns raised by the Federation of Retail Licensed Trade and Northern Ireland Hotels Federation about their statutory duty to "preserve order" on their premises and about the draft single equality Bill; and to make a statement.
(AQO840/01)

Mr Mark Durkan: We wish to take question 1 and question 7 together.
No decisions have been taken as to what provisions will be included in the single equality Bill. A policy paper setting out our proposals will be issued for consultation by the end of the year. Many licensees contend that an exemption is needed in anti-discrimination law to protect them against claims of discrimination in which they state that they are acting to preserve order as required by licensing laws. We shall take those views into account when forming our proposals.

Mr Seamus Close: I am encouraged by that response. By way of assistance, I suggest that the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister give serious consideration to including, in the single equality Bill, section 15(2) of the Equal Status Act 2000 in the South of Ireland. That might help to alleviate the problem.
Do the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister recognise the need for some degree of mediation or arbitration to be facilitated when there is a dispute over admission, rather than it ending up in court, as happens at present? That is unsatisfactory and somewhat expensive.

Mr Mark Durkan: The Member has asked us to consider section 15(2) of the Republic of Ireland’s Equal Status Act 2000, which provides an exemption from anti-discrimination law for action taken by, or on behalf of, those who are licensed to sell alcohol when they are acting in good faith to ensure compliance with the licensing laws. The Republic of Ireland has a general provision, similar to that in our current legislation, which provides that nothing in the Equal Status Act 2000 shall be construed as prohibiting any action taken under any enactment. When forming our proposals, we shall consider the impact of the exemptions in the Republic and the experiences there.
The Member said that he was encouraged by my response. We shall take those issues into account. However, that will not predetermine our conclusions. I do not want anything to be misunderstood or misrepresented. It would be wrong for me to speculate on any measure that might be taken on mediation at this stage in advance of court action. However, we accept the Member’s point.

Mr Roy Beggs: Question 7.

Mr Speaker: The Minister has already made it clear that he is grouping questions 1 and 7 together, and has had leave to do so. This is your opportunity for a supplementary question — if you wish to take it.

Mr Roy Beggs: That was a misunderstanding.
Does the Deputy First Minister acknowledge that members of the Northern Ireland Hotels Federation and the Federation of Retail Licensed Trade wish to ensure that no one would be discriminated on grounds of religion, sex, political opinion or disability, and does he acknowledge that there is concern at the number of weak cases supported by the Equality Commission? I understand that about 80% of such cases have been lost, and others have been settled out of court to avoid legal costs.
Will he advise the House what financial penalty exists for those who take costly legal cases without having supporting evidence?

Mr Mark Durkan: We are aware of the representations that have been made by the licensed and hotel trades. As I have said, we shall consider all the relevant issues as we prepare the single equality Bill. However, I am not in a position to speculate on any issues pertaining to the Equality Commission’s possible involvement, under the single equality Bill, in any cases that may be taken. We are looking at what the single equality Bill should provide for, and our focus should be on those legislative arrangements.

Mr Jim Shannon: Will the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister accept that the proposed single equality Bill will put publicans under intense pressure to stop unruly elements from creating havoc on their property? It should be made clear that publicans should have the right to bar anyone. For example, someone wearing a Celtic top who walks into a bar full of Rangers supporters could, and probably would, lead to a breach of the peace.

Mr Speaker: Order. I am referring to the Chamber, not to the job of publicans.

Mr Mark Durkan: The Member’s reference to the single equality Bill as it stands is somewhat erroneous. As has been indicated before in the House in answers from the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister, the single equality Bill has not yet come before the House. In relation to the matters under discussion, we have to take account of the requirements under licensing legislation that publicans ensure good order on their premises. We want to be certain that we take care to ensure that there are no breaches of the peace. We also want to make sure that the single equality Bill will be effective as an equality measure and will provide for common sense legislation in respect of all other considerations.

Visit to West Tyrone

Mr Derek Hussey: 2. asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister if the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister plan to tour West Tyrone soon.
(AQO825/01)

Rt Hon David Trimble: We have no plans to make a joint tour of West Tyrone in the near future.

Mr Derek Hussey: I am slightly disappointed. Should the First Minister decide to visit West Tyrone, he will find that Ulster Unionists there are focused on their Unionism, despite being the minority community in the west. Indeed, the First Minister should also know that, during any visits that I make to Ulster Unionist Party groups in West Tyrone, I and they do not waste our time discussing any form of united or agreed Ireland, as some others have suggested.
In the event of a visit to West Tyrone, will the First Minister give me an assurance that he will take time to address the concerns of groups representing victims of terrorism in the west? Republican terrorists are still actively targeting members of those groups.

Rt Hon David Trimble: I am glad to receive the assurance from the Member that in his branches and association, local Unionists are not discussing any form of united or agreed Ireland. I was astonished at the claim made by a leading member of the DUP that that was happening. I wonder whether he has any evidence, and whether he would care to produce it. I dare say it is like so many things that we hear from that quarter — assertions without evidence.
Victims’ groups and individual victims from West Tyrone have played an important role in research recently carried out into service provision for victims. Officials from our Victims Unit have visited a number of victims’ support groups in the area during the past year and assisted with a variety of issues. A capacity- building programme to help victims’ groups increase their expertise in seeking and securing funding was recently completed, and several groups in the area participated.
On the question of the continuing targeting of individuals by paramilitary organisations, I am sure that Members will join with me in congratulating the police and security forces on their success in the neighbouring area of Coalisland this morning.

Some Members: Hear, hear.

Mr Speaker: I have noted with some concern in recent weeks that questions of a very open kind have been tabled concerning constituencies. The supplementaries to those questions seem to bear little relation to the constituency concerned, which must disappoint the constituents. However, there is another dilemma about such questions open to the constituency alone. If there are only two further supplementaries, I am in the invidious position of discriminating against some Members or parties from that constituency, and it is not the Speaker’s place to do so.
I shall look carefully at the matter of open questions on constituencies, especially when they are not followed by supplementaries that are truly relevant. On this occasion, I shall permit all the parties that are represented in that constituency to have a supplementary question.

Mr Oliver Gibson: I am glad that the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister have no intention of touring the constituency of West Tyrone. They should now be aware of the insult that they delivered to the Unionist community last week when they both displayed Republican tactics by boycotting and abstaining from the vote on the provision of a memento for the primary schoolchildren of West Tyrone to mark the Golden Jubilee. Will the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister take this opportunity to apologise?

Mr Speaker: Order. I rule the question out of order, since the Member clearly ignored what I expressly said.

Mr Eugene McMenamin: I assure the Speaker that my question is on a bread-and-butter issue. Given the high levels of unemployment in West Tyrone, can the Minister assure us that all industrialists — [Interruption].

Mr Speaker: Order.

Mr Eugene McMenamin: May I start again, Mr Speaker? Given the high levels of unemployment in West Tyrone, can the Minister assure us that all industrialists who are interested in setting up in Northern Ireland are being encouraged to visit West Tyrone, and that they are being given every incentive to locate there? I particularly refer to my home town of Strabane, which has been plagued with high levels of unemployment for years.

Mr Speaker: Order. That is a question for the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment. However, as the First Minister appears to be ready with a response, I would hate to deprive him and the House of delivering it.

Rt Hon David Trimble: When questions of an open character are tabled, the Office looks around the horizon — from a West Tyrone perspective, in this case — to ensure that there are answers for likely questions. In this case we are similarly positioned. I have been informed by the IDB that it takes a keen interest in these issues, and 14 of the 16 inward investment projects initiated during 2000-01 were in New TSN areas.
Since April 1999, the IDB has introduced 36 potential investors to West Tyrone, and it has secured new inward investment courtesy of a £1·2 million project by Fabplus. The company will manufacture sprinkler systems in Strabane creating 30 jobs. I am sure the Member is familiar with the project. The Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment is focused on that, and it is one of its principal concerns.

Mr Pat Doherty: Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I am pleased to be associated with the First Minister’s rejection of the hollow claims made by the DUP. When the First and Deputy First Minister consider a visit to West Tyrone, will they seriously consider visiting Castlederg, which has a tense community relations problem that we are endeavouring to resolve? I feel that a visit from the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister would go some way to helping to resolve that tension.

Rt Hon David Trimble: I am familiar with Castlederg, having been there on several occasions. I am aware that, during the course of the troubles, the village of Castlederg has experienced a significant number of fatalities — of murders. I suspect that if that were calculated on a per capita of the population basis, Castlederg would emerge as one of the worst affected parts of Northern Ireland.
Against that background, I am not surprised that there are some feelings and tensions in the area. It is our hope that those tensions will be ameliorated as we see progress towards establishing a commitment to exclusively peaceful and democratic means, through the continued operation and success of this institution. In the long run, that holds the best hope for the entire community, including the people of Castlederg. We shall consider the matter that the Member has mentioned.

Mr Barry McElduff: Further to that, I invite the Minister — [Interruption].

Mr Speaker: This is an opportunity for the Member to put question 3, which stands in his name.

Irish Honours System

Mr Barry McElduff: 3. asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister if it will consult with President Mary McAleese on an honours system that would be appropriate and fitting for Irish nationally- minded citizens.
(AQO843/01)

Mr Mark Durkan: We have no plans to consult President McAleese on that issue.

Mr Barry McElduff: I wish to record my great disappointment that the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister has consistently underplayed the North/South element of the Good Friday Agreement. I ask the Minister to work with President McAleese to ensure that the profile of the President’s Award — the challenge to the young people of Ireland between the ages of 15 and 25 — is increased in the North, because the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister is not doing anything to ameliorate the cold house for Nationalists in the North.

Mr Mark Durkan: I reject any allegation that the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister is in any way undercommitted to North/South arrangements. On previous occasions, we have answered questions on the institutional format, and we have made it clear that we are committed to ensuring that the North/South arrangements work in a full and effective way across a range of issues. Those include looking at — as we did in the institutional format — extending areas that would come under formal co-operation and, therefore, the accountability mechanisms that attach to the North/South Ministerial Council. To develop matters in those ways hardly implies a lack of commitment.
The Irish Government have considered the matter of honours on several occasions, going back to 1930. It has always been felt that any honours system could be introduced only on a cross-party basis. It has been the subject of discussion in the Dáil, including during the current session, and the matter is one that the Government and other parties are addressing. An honours system, as such, is not a matter for the President, and I hope that the Member recognises the significance of article 40 of the Constitution of Ireland, because I certainly do.
With respect to any other issues, our Office remains open, positive and encouraging to anyone interested in promoting activities in, or participation from, Northern Ireland.

Mr John Fee: I am speaking as an Irish nationally- minded citizen — that is honour enough in itself, and I seek no further reward or award. However, does the Minister agree that there is a place for a system to recognise the efforts of citizens on this island — their efforts to improve the quality of life and to create an egalitarian society — but that in the past some of those honours and award systems have been abused, and have been used solely to award the great and the good and the rich and the powerful? Any future system should recognise that even modest efforts by people throughout society provide a rich and powerful contribution to the cause of peace, prosperity and stability in the country.

Mr Mark Durkan: The Republican and socialist tradition has been to oppose any system that might extend privilege or patronage. However, many people realise that it is appropriate to find ways to recognise contributions made to society. Many countries, including republics, have systems that recognise citizens’ outstanding contributions and dedication.
Should the Irish Government introduce a system to recognise and reflect such contributions, many in the House and elsewhere would be happy to welcome that move. From another perspective, many people appreciate honours that are conferred differently.

Rev Dr Ian Paisley: Will the Minister take note of how many Irish nationally-minded citizens have been honoured by Her Majesty the Queen recently and have been glad to receive her honour?

Mr Speaker: Order.

Mr Mark Durkan: I have no problem in noting that people have received honours under the British honour system, be they Nationalist-minded or Unionist-minded. They are entitled to accept or decline any honour offered to or conferred on them.

Executive Business

Mr David Ford: 4. asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister to make a statement on business transacted at the previous meeting of the Executive.
(AQO833/01)

Rt Hon David Trimble: The previous Executive meeting was held on 14 February 2002, and a copy of the press release issued following the meeting has been placed in the Assembly Library.

Mr David Ford: I note the terse way in which the First Minister answered that question, given that a fortnight ago Mr Haughey refused to give any indication of business to be tabled for the next Executive meeting. I suppose the fact that the Executive have announced that a press release has been made available is something for which to be grateful.
Is the First Minister aware that anyone who can read English or Welsh can access the National Assembly for Wales web site and print out minutes of its Cabinet meetings? On 19 June 2001, in answer to a supplementary to my question about freedom of information, the then Deputy First Minister advised the Assembly that
"We are currently considering the most appropriate date to implement the Freedom of Information Act 2000 in the devolved Administration." — [Official Report, Bound Volume 11, Page 221].
Will the Minister advise the House when something is going to be done about freedom of information and stop muttering platitudes?

Rt Hon David Trimble: I am happy to inform the Member that Northern Ireland will be included in the UK freedom of information legislation, and it will be implemented here. On Mr Ford’s general point, there is a need for confidentiality with regard to discussions in the Executive. The discussions regularly refer to policy issues, which would not be appropriate to publish.

A Member: Will the Minister comment on the Welsh situation?

Rt Hon David Trimble: I cannot comment on the discussions in Wales. Wales is an entirely different case as the extent of devolution is narrower there. It would be more to the point if a similar practice obtained in Cabinet discussions in London, Scotland or Dublin. That is not the case. The Member’s question is misconceived.

Mr Eamonn ONeill: In order to throw more light on the matter, can the First Minister outline the major issues that have come before the Executive since he and Mr Durkan took office in November?

Rt Hon David Trimble: Several major issues have come before us during recent weeks and months, and those are mainly in the public domain. One matter was mentioned in the rather terse press release that was issued last Thursday, which said that
"Ministers discussed … the forthcoming spending review."
It is difficult to conceive of an issue of greater importance to the Assembly and all the Departments. The spending review 2002, which will culminate in whatever decisions the Chancellor makes in the summer, is crucial. The Assembly would regard the Executive as highly remiss if they did not consider the matter, the approaches that they will make and the preparations for it. Moreover, the Assembly would regard the Executive as extremely foolish if they were to consider those matters in the full glare of publicity.

Mr Sammy Wilson: Will the First Minister tell us whether the Executive, having met on 14 February, two days after the Secretary of State called for Sinn Féin to join the Northern Ireland Policing Board, discussed the aforementioned issue? Does he agree that the absence of Sinn Féin from the Policing Board has enabled discussions to proceed without the poison that that party normally injects into public bodies, which makes it hard to reach resolutions on difficult issues? Will he tell the House whether he agrees with the call from the Irish Prime Minister that further concessions should be given to Sinn Féin to entice its members on to the Policing Board?

Rt Hon David Trimble: I am not sure if the Member’s last point is accurate, but I dare say he would not allow the detail of what was or was not said to interfere with his comments.
Of course the Policing Board was not discussed at the Executive’s meeting. The Executive discuss Executive business, which relates primarily to matters that are devolved to the Assembly. As the Member mentioned the matter, I am sure that, like most people in Northern Ireland, he is pleased both with the way in which the Policing Board has operated so far and with the broad party consensus that exists on it among the Member’s party, the SDLP and my party. We all congratulate the DUP on the positive role that it has played and lament the fact that it has not been equally positive elsewhere.

Use of Executive Office in Brussels

Mr Billy Armstrong: 5. asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister how it intends to utilise the Executive Office in Brussels to assist Assembly Members and Statutory Committees in their business.
(AQO834/01)

Mr Mark Durkan: The new office in Brussels is a valuable resource, not only for the Executive but for Northern Ireland as a whole, and its facilities should be available to a broad range of interests. Specifically, the Brussels office will assist Assembly Committees in conducting inquiries that have a European dimension.
To date, the Committee for Enterprise Trade and Investment, the Committee of the Centre and the Committee for Regional Development have used the office during visits to Brussels. Officials based in the office assisted those Committees by arranging meetings with relevant contacts in Brussels and by providing advice on the organisation of the visits. The Committee for Finance and Personnel has approached the office about a further visit in the spring, and the Brussels office will welcome any other Statutory Committee that wishes to visit. The office will also assist Committees by providing factual information on request about European Union institutions, procedures, policies and laws. Individual Members who visit Brussels may wish to contact the office for advice and information about the facilities available.

Mr Billy Armstrong: It is good to see that so many Committees have been using the office. Are there any plans for the Agriculture Committee to use it? We all know how important agriculture is to the Province, and I would welcome the Committee’s having an opportunity to use the office.

Mr Mark Durkan: I mentioned the Committees that have already been in contact with the office. They have either already used it or are planning to do so. The Committee for Agriculture and Rural Development was not one of those that I mentioned. The Committee must determine whether it wants to visit Brussels, and, if so, whether it wants to avail itself of the useful facilities that the office provides.

Mr Conor Murphy: In the run-up to the establishment of the office in Brussels did the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister have any contact with the Northern Ireland Centre in Europe? I understand that it did not. If that and various other reports on the office are examples of its networking abilities, it could become a costly and futile initiative.

Mr Mark Durkan: The Northern Ireland Centre in Europe ceased to operate in Brussels some time ago, which I regret. It would have been helpful to see a more seemly transition between the arrangements that the Northern Ireland Centre in Europe was providing and the current arrangements through the Office of the Northern Ireland Executive in Brussels.
We now need to progress on that basis, to maximise the potential benefits of the Office of the Northern Ireland Executive in Europe and also to maximise the effectiveness of our dealings with European issues here. The Executive and a range of Departments are dealing with European issues in a detailed and technical manner, and we must also involve other local groups and interests. The Northern Ireland Centre in Europe can contribute to that.

Mr Speaker: I regret that some Members were unable to put further questions today, owing to a particularly large number of questions, including supplementary questions. The time for questions to the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister is up.

Culture, arts and leisure

Mr Speaker: There will now be questions to the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure. I remind the House that question No 1, in the name of Mrs Nelis, has been withdrawn. She cannot be present today as her husband has experienced an accident.

Cultural Heritage of East Belfast

Dr Ian Adamson: 2. asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure what steps have been taken by his Department to preserve and protect the cultural heritage of East Belfast.
(AQO829/01)
(Mr Deputy Speaker [Mr McClelland] in the Chair)

Mr Michael McGimpsey: I want to begin by acknowledging the rich and diverse range of cultural heritage in East Belfast such as its world-famous shipbuilding heritage, HMS Caroline, Craigavon House, and the great writer CS Lewis — to name but a few. The preservation and protection of the area’s cultural heritage are matters for bodies from both the public and independent sectors. The Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure’s primary role is to provide jointly, with the Department of the Environment, the strategic framework for the preservation of the cultural heritage of the whole of Northern Ireland. At a local level, the cultural forum that my Department established to bring together a range of relevant public bodies has already provided direct assistance to district councils preparing cultural strategies in the context of local integrated plans.

Mr Donovan McClelland: Order. It is difficult to hear the Minister over the conversations that are taking place in the Chamber.

Mr Michael McGimpsey: The Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure is working with the National Museums and Galleries of Northern Ireland and Belfast Industrial Heritage, among others, to preserve and promote East Belfast’s unique industrial heritage through the creation of a museum of sea and sky. The Titanic will be one of the key themes. The Department of the Environment has already listed some of the historic buildings and dock installations in the area known as Titanic Quarter. I hope that East Belfast will play a full role in the Imagine Belfast bid for the city to be named European City of Culture 2008, which has received significant funding from my Department. The competition closes next month, and Belfast has a strong case.

Dr Ian Adamson: I thank the Minister for his comprehensive reply. However, is he aware of public concern over the disposal of Ormiston House, the home of Viscount William James Pirrie, who built the Titanic, of Little Lea, the boyhood home of CS Lewis, and of Cabin Hill, where the first Northern Ireland Cabinet met? Is he fully aware of the proposed development of the Cherryvalley nursery, which threatens the whole river corridor in that historic area? Will he bring his considerable influence to bear on the requisite authorities to ensure that public concerns on those issues are finally allayed?

Mr Michael McGimpsey: I am aware of some of those issues. However, preservation of historic buildings, such as Ormiston House and Cabin Hill, is outside my remit. Those are listed buildings under the Environment and Heritage Service, which is a section of the Department of the Environment. Protection of those buildings would therefore be its responsibility.
My Department could, however, become involved in the future use of those houses in a heritage role, it that were proposed. As things stand, the matters that the Member mentioned are primarily for the Department of the Environment, the Planning Service and the Environment and Heritage Service.

River Bush Salmon Stocks

Mr Gardiner Kane: 3. asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure what action he is taking to increase salmon stocks in the River Bush.
(AQO851/01)

Mr Michael McGimpsey: The Department has been aware for some time of concerns over the decreased number of salmon returning to the river as a result of the reduction in the numbers of adult fish returning to spawn in the river. That reflects a general trend of falling stocks across the north Atlantic.
Several measures have been pursued in the last few years to increase stocks, and more are planned this year. First, the river will be stocked annually with hatchery- reared smolts. Those ranch salmon provide good angling on the lower stretches of the river, although they are not allowed to migrate upstream to spawn, as they may detrimentally affect the international salmon research project that is being undertaken on the river.
Secondly, a programme of increased in-river stocking with hatchery-reared salmon fry and parr is scheduled to commence in spring 2002. That will yield increased numbers of smolts going to sea, which should increase the number of adult fish returning to the river.
Thirdly, the marine survival of salmon is a major concern. To help to address that locally, I recently obtained £1·5 million from the Executive programme fund for a voluntary scheme to buy out coastal commercial salmon netting entitlements. That should increase the number of adult fish returning to Northern Ireland river systems, including the River Bush.
Finally, a river warden has been recruited specifically for the River Bush to tackle poaching problems and to assist in upgrading habitat to provide additional spawning opportunities for returning fish. Those measures show that the Department is implementing major measures to increase stocks in the River Bush.

Mr Gardiner Kane: Are the interests of tourism, the River Bush or anglers served by scientists continuing to develop fin clip numbers between Bushmills hatchery and the river mouth, whilst continuing to neglect the restocking of the river to any significant degree by introducing wild salmon fry?
In 1983-84, wild salmon stocks in the River Bush were at a record low. Could the actions that were taken to correct the situation then be employed now, as stocks are at an all-time low, just as they were in 1983?

Mr Michael McGimpsey: Although I do not have the exact figures for 1983, I know that stocks, particularly wild salmon, are declining. Several measures are in place to try to address that, of which buying up nets is one. The continuous angling development programme, which follows on from the salmon enhancement programme, is designed specifically to carry out improvements in the habitat. The salmon management plan, a scientific programme that sets spawning targets in the catchment area to ensure that the spawning levels are maintained, is a further relevant measure. There are also restrictions on exploitation.
Bag limits have been introduced. From 1 June 2002 until the end of the season, a limit of two fish a day will be permitted. Prior to that, all fish caught will be returned. I mentioned the role of the warden on the river. There is also the River Bush project, which is an internationally- renowned scientific project to examie the marine survival of salmon. The River Bush is used as an index river in that project. A great deal of work is ongoing.
Those measures are designed to address a combination of factors, which means that wild salmon stocks are reducing. It is estimated that they have reduced by around 50%. That fills us with concern, and we want to address the matter. However, the unknown factor of the ability of salmon to survive in the north Atlantic is outside our control. Evidence suggests that matters such as temperature increases and pollution are also having a seriously adverse effect.

Mr James Leslie: I welcome the Minister’s initiative to support the salmon population. He will be aware that a slurry or silage effluent spill can undo much good work with one blow. Several technological advances have been made in the reprocessing of farm waste. Would the Minister’s Department support initiatives advanced by the farming community to introduce some of those methods in Northern Ireland?

Mr Michael McGimpsey: The short answer is yes. It is no secret that pollution presents a major problem, not only in the numbers of fish that are killed but in the damage that it causes to the habitat. The Department would support all reasonable measures proposed by the farming industry or by any sector to deal with slurry waste entering and polluting the river systems.
On a positive note, no fish were killed in the River Bush last year. However, as Mr Leslie is aware, other rivers were not so fortunate.

Darts

Mr Seamus Close: 4. asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure, pursuant to AQO 399/00 and AQO 420/01, to give an update on plans by the NI Sports Council to recognise darts as a sport.
(AQO848/01)

Mr Michael McGimpsey: The Sports Council’s officers’ recognition panel met on 3 December 2001 and reaffirmed previous decisions that darts is not an activity that they wish to formally recognise as a sport. I refer the Member to the answer given to AQO 420/01 on 26 November 2001, and repeat that darts has not so far been recognised as a sport, on the grounds that it involves insufficient physical activity. Recognition per se would not lead to funding; it would simply allow access to funding. In the circumstances, I suggest that funding by sponsorship should be pursued.

Mr Seamus Close: Through you, Mr Deputy Speaker, and in the immortal words of John McEnroe "you cannot be serious". The Minister rightly defined sport as "all forms of physical activity". Does he not agree that darts, insofar as it concerns the body as opposed to the mind or the spirit, relates to throwing, which is a physical exercise. In some games a ball is thrown; a punch is thrown in boxing, and those are recognised sports. Dart players throw darts. Should the Minister not take up this discriminatory ruling and pursue it with the full vigour of his office to ensure that those who participate in the worthy sport of darts — tens of thousands of players in Northern Ireland — get the recognition that they duly deserve? In so doing, he might request action —

Mr Donovan McClelland: Mr Close, you come very close to making a speech.

Mr Seamus Close: My earlier question referred to equality and discrimination. Surely to goodness the Minister would not wish to see action taken through the equality Bill?

Mr Michael McGimpsey: It is not the first time that the Assembly has heard Mr Close’s impassioned plea on behalf of darts. I could throw "You cannot be serious" back to him.

Mr Seamus Close: Would that be a physical throw?

Mr Michael McGimpsey: Or a rhetorical one, whichever Mr Close wishes. I appreciate the case that he makes, but it is out of my hands. The sports councils of Northern Ireland, England, Scotland and Wales come together and determine whether a sport is recognised. They have met several times to discuss the issue of darts, and each time, darts has been recognised as a game, a pastime or a hobby — but not as a sport. The game is played in any pub in the land and it is enjoyed by many. However, the central thrust seems to be that a sport has access to lottery funding. I reiterate that an activity’s recognition as a sport does not guarantee its funding. There are other criteria, not least of which are sporting priorities.
However, there are other avenues of funding to pursue. It would be wrong of me to ask the Sports Council to skew the criteria that it uses to define a sport — that is to say as a sufficient physical activity — in order to allow darts access to another funding stream. Sponsorship from brewery companies is a ready source of funding.

Tobacco Advertising and Sponsorship in Motorcycling

Mr Kieran McCarthy: 5. asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure to outline (a) his policy on the use of tobacco advertising and sponsorship in motorcycling; and (b) any discussions he has had with the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety on the issue.
(AQO849/01)

Mr Michael McGimpsey: Ideally, I would like tobacco advertising and sponsorship of motorcycling to be eliminated. However, I recognise that the sport needs that advertising and sponsorship to survive. Unfortunately, alternative sponsorship is rare, and that is why motorcycle sport continues to rely almost exclusively on tobacco sponsorship.
Responsibility for any decision to ban or restrict tobacco advertising and sponsorship in sport lies with the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety. Although I have not had any discussions with Minister de Brún, I know that a private Member’s Bill that will extend to Northern Ireland is moving through the legislative process.

Mr Kieran McCarthy: The Minister’s acceptance of tobacco sponsorship and his dealings with the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety disappoint me. I specifically mentioned motorcycling because of that sport’s recent acceptance of sponsorship from the tobacco industry. My concern applies to all sports that accept sponsorship from that source.
Does the Minister agree that, in view of the 3,000- plus deaths in Northern Ireland from tobacco-related illnesses and the enormous unnecessary costs to the Health Service — [Interruption].

Mr Donovan McClelland: There is a good deal of background conversation, which makes it difficult for me to hear the Member. I remind Members that, if they wish to hold a prolonged conversation, there are many other rooms in the Building.

Mr Kieran McCarthy: Does the Minister agree that, in view of the 3,000-plus smoking-related deaths in Northern Ireland and the enormous unnecessary cost to the Health Service, his Department should take remedial measures to stop the promotion of tobacco and other health-damaging products during sporting activities?

Mr Michael McGimpsey: Tobacco sponsorship has all but disappeared, and motorcycling is the last sport to avail of it. I would support a ban on tobacco advertising, provided that there were some lead-in time to allow the sport to seek alternative funding. As things stand, if a ban were introduced tomorrow, that would have a major effect on motorbike racing; for example, short- circuit motorbike racing would face great difficulties and could disappear.
The Westminster Government introduced a Bill to ban all tobacco advertisement and sponsorship by July 2003. That Bill was overtaken by the general election. However, the private Member’s Bill, which replicates the Government’s Bill, is working its way through Westminster. It will set a deadline of October 2006 for the ban of all tobacco advertising.
The Government’s original Bill had derogations for snooker and Formula 1 racing. We do not have Formula 1 racing in Northern Ireland, and little snooker is played. The private Member’s Bill would end the derogations. Therefore, the Member has referred to a process that is already under way and that may take care of the problem that he identified. If it does not, the issue can be debated again in the House. However, it is a matter for central legislation. It is important to have a standardised means of addressing such issues in the United Kingdom.
I would support — and I doubt whether anyone in the House would oppose — such a ban.

Mr John Dallat: I have been a reformed smoker for some 20 years. Does the Minister agree that cigarette sponsorship of any sport undermines the campaign to improve the health of our citizens? Will he ensure that the Westminster legislation is relayed to the Assembly so that it can lend its support to that initiative?

Mr Michael McGimpsey: I am happy to circulate the details of the proposed legislation to Members.

European Football Championship 2008

Mr David Ford: 6. asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure to detail any discussions he has had with his counterparts in Scotland and the Republic of Ireland regarding a joint bid to host the European football championship in 2008.
(AQO850/01)

Mr Michael McGimpsey: There has been no formal contact with either Scotland or the Republic of Ireland at ministerial level on this issue. This is a matter for the football authorities concerned, and the Irish Football Association (IFA) has consistently indicated that it has no plans to seek involvement in a joint bid because of the lack of suitable facilities. Given those circumstances, it would have been inappropriate for me to intervene.
The establishment of a national stadium is a key issue that is central to such a bid and to the development of a soccer strategy in Northern Ireland. Following the end of the strategy’s consultation period on 31 January, I will consider the issue more closely with the other sports that may be involved.

Mr David Ford: It is disappointing that nothing is happening at this stage. Does the 2008 championship not represent what is possibly the last opportunity to get a national stadium under way in Northern Ireland? Given the affection that Members on the Minister’s side of the House have for Scotland, and the affection that Members on the other side of the House have for the Republic — although some follow Glasgow Celtic — is it not time that we made the most of the opportunity to join with the bid that is being submitted by the two other football associations?

Mr Michael McGimpsey: First, I do not regard this as the last chance to establish a national stadium. It would not be right to expend considerable sums of money and resources that we do not have simply to race to join in with a soccer tournament. The IFA is football’s governing body, and this matter is its responsibility. The Scottish Football Association (SFA) approached the IFA, which stated that it was unable to make a joint bid because it did not have the adequate facilities.
The criteria for the bid must also be considered. Eight stadiums, each with 30,000 seats, are required. Scotland would provide six stadiums; it already has four stadiums and it will upgrade a further two. The Irish Republic, which is joining the bid, would provide two stadiums. The last date for joining the bid is the end of February, so the timescale has been too tight. In addition to that, while I do not wish the bid to fail, there is no guarantee that the joint bid by Scotland and the Irish Republic will succeed in 2008. They face stiff competition.
This opportunity will arise every four years. We will become better informed as to how to make progress through the process of considering the establishment of stadiums, the soccer strategy, and the needs of other sports, whose strategies will help us to determine their needs. A substantial investment would be needed. A brand-new 30,000-seater stadium would cost some £60 million. The cost of land and site works, and running costs of about £2 million a year would be added to that. The refurbishment of the existing Windsor Park and support for other existing stadiums would be a much cheaper option.
We must ask the sports involved whether this is how they would want us to spend £60 million. Refurbishment seems to be the best way to achieve such facilities at the lowest cost, while dealing with the needs of the sports involved. This matter involves football, but it also concerns rugby, Gaelic football and athletics. Those sports’ long-term needs must also be addressed.

Mr Eamonn ONeill: The Minister’s answer was so thorough that I will have to change my supplementary question. In the light of the difficulties that the Department is facing, and as a goodwill gesture, will the Minister consider inviting the increasingly successful Republic of Ireland World Cup team on a courtesy visit to Northern Ireland to promote some of the work that we are trying to achieve through the soccer strategy?

Mr Michael McGimpsey: Such invitations are a matter for the Irish Football Association (IFA), but I will certainly take the suggestion on board and will discuss that matter with the IFA. The IFA is constantly looking for international teams to visit Belfast. The facilities at Windsor Park preclude some teams from playing here, but the hosting of major international matches at Windsor Park is the best and surest way to ensure that the Northern Ireland team reaches the required standard to take part in the next Union of European Football Associations (UEFA) European championships in 2004.

Mr Billy Hutchinson: Can the Minister confirm that last week a spokesman for the IFA gave a frosty reception to any suggestion of involving the IFA? Can he also confirm that UEFA’s rules clearly state that it will not accept a bid from more than two countries?

Mr Michael McGimpsey: I am not aware of any such statement from the IFA. However, I can confirm that the IFA indicated to the Scottish Football Association that an expression of interest would be forthcoming, but that the IFA was not able to go forward because it considered the prospect of participating in a joint bid to be impractical due to the lack of appropriate facilities. If my understanding of the situation is wrong, I will try to find out more and write to the Member on the matter.
I do not believe that there is any limit on the number of partners in a bid. There can be more than two — in fact, UEFA was looking for partnership bids rather than single-country bids. I understand that one of the strongest bids being put forward for the 2004 rounds comes from Scandinavia, which includes Denmark, Sweden and Norway in a joint bid.

Mr Jim Shannon: Does the Minister agree that Windsor Park can continue to be the national stadium, and that the soccer strategy that is being presented for consideration by the Committee for Culture, Arts and Leisure and the Department should be in place before any new national stadium goes ahead?

Mr Michael McGimpsey: I agree. The football and Gaelic sports strategies are being finalised, and we must also examine the strategies for rugby, athletics and other interested sports. There is no reason to rule out the redevelopment of Windsor Park. The resource implications of such matters must be considered, and it is a question of whether it will be more cost-effective to invest in the refurbishment of existing facilities to bring them up to the required standard or to build new facilities — I have given you a flavour of the amount of money that that will involve. The redevelopment of existing sites will probably be a much cheaper option, but that matter will be finalised later.

Townland Names

Mr Barry McElduff: 7. asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure if he has any plans to include townland names on all correspondence emanating from his Department.
(AQO845/01)

Mr Michael McGimpsey: My officials are encouraged to reply to correspondence using the address supplied by the correspondent. Townland names are a valuable element of our rich cultural and linguistic heritage; and I welcome their use in addresses, along with the postcode and, where appropriate, the road name. My Department is also taking specific steps to protect and promote the important cultural and linguistic heritage preserved in our townlands.

Mr Barry McElduff: I thank the Minister for his commitment to the promotion of townland names. Does he agree that it is reasonable to expect the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure to take the lead in a major campaign aimed at promoting townland names? Will the Department incorporate in all official correspondence the name of the townland in which its headquarters at Interpoint is located?

Mr Michael McGimpsey: My Department is taking significant steps to safeguard and strengthen that aspect of our cultural and linguistic heritage.
One example is the common address file — an initiative from the Ordnance Survey of Northern Ireland, which is part of the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure. It is looking at a standardised form of address for Government and the private sector, which will include townland names. We have received a successful bid for £1 million of funding through Executive programme funds to advance that scheme, which will mean that every address will be re-united with its townland name. That will happen; the next step is to collect the address data. It is important to recognise that townland names have never disappeared — they are detailed on ordnance survey maps, depending on the size of the map. The common address file will ensure that townland names are on standardised forms of addresses in future.

Mr Tommy Gallagher: Does the Minister agree that one of the greatest obstacles to the retention of our townland names is the Post Office policy of giving preference to road names, a policy which is driven by the interests of big business and its narrow, selfish interests? Will his Department use its influence to have the Post Office change its policy, and take on board the concerns of local communities?

Mr Donovan McClelland: I must ask you to be brief, Minister.

Mr Michael McGimpsey: I readily agree that the introduction of road names by the Post Office was the biggest threat to the common usage of townland names, but I do not agree that it was to do with big business. As I said in my answer to Mr McElduff, a standardised form of address, including townland names, is coming on board through the common address file in the near future.

Agriculture and Rural Development

BSE-Contaminated Tissue

Mr Joe Byrne: 1. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development to confirm that all possible measures have been taken to prevent BSE-contaminated tissue from entering the food chain; and to make a statement.
(AQO852/01)

Ms Brid Rodgers: Members will be aware that no bovine animal of more than 30 months of age enters the human food chain. Regarding animals under 30 months of age, which pass both anti- and post-mortem examinations, all tissues that could potentially be infected with the BSE agent are removed. The Specified Risk Material Regulations (Northern Ireland) 1997, as amended, requires that all bovine tissues — otherwise known as specified risk material — that could potentially harbour the BSE agent are removed as soon as is reasonably practicable after the slaughter of the animal, immediately stained blue, and disposed off by rendering or by incineration at approved premises. All carcasses for human consumption, including imported carcasses, are inspected by departmental staff to ensure that all specified risk material has been removed.
The Department and the Food Standards Agency place a high emphasis on the controls in this area of work. We regularly carry out audits in meat plants to ensure that all best practices are being followed. The results of those audits, which are published monthly in the UK BSE bulletin, give us a high level of confidence that specified risk material is being properly disposed of and is unable to enter the food chain.

Mr Joe Byrne: I thank the Minister for her comprehensive answer. Does she agree that maximum consumer confidence in food safety standards must be the priority, both in food production and distribution? What other measures might be in place to protect the consumer?

Ms Brid Rodgers: I fully recognise the importance of consumer confidence to the agrifood industry. However, we cannot expect to gain that confidence without securing the safety of our food. As far as beef is concerned, no bovine animal of more than 30 months of age is permitted to enter the human food chain. That measure ensures that cattle that show no sign of BSE, but which may be incubating the disease, cannot enter the food chain. In addition, all specified risk material — brain, spinal cord, et cetera — is removed from all bovine carcasses. The over-30-month scheme exists to ensure the safe removal of all parts of bovines of more than 30 months of age from the food chain, in case of early incubation.

Rural Development Programme: EU Moneys

Mr Francie Molloy: 2. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development how the EU moneys redirected to the rural development programme’s "modulation money" will be spent, and who will benefit.
(AQO863/01)

Ms Brid Rodgers: As required under EU Council regulation 1259/99, funds raised by the application of modulation can be deployed only for the purposes of agrienvironment, forestation of our agriculture land, farmer early retirement or less-favoured area (LFA) support measures. There is also a requirement that expenditure of those moneys must be confined to new recipients or schemes. Therefore, in the Northern Ireland rural development regulation plan, modulation funds have been devoted entirely to agrienvironmental measures and grants for the forestation of agriculture land. The beneficiaries are landowners or farmers with a long-term lease.
Some of the projected receipts for modulation have yet to be allocated under the rural development regulation plan, but current EU rules dictate that farmers and landowners will receive those moneys too.

Mr Francie Molloy: Can a region decide what the money will be used for? Very few farmers have entered the countryside management scheme, because they do not see themselves simply as images for tourism through managing the hedgerows. The Department of Agriculture and Rural Development has devoted many staff and a great deal of administration costs to the scheme. What direct benefit will result for farmers who are deprived now?

Ms Brid Rodgers: Regions can decide within the confines of the allowed measures, to which I have already referred. They are forestation, the early retirement scheme, agrienvironment measures and area support measures as well as the non-accompanying measures, which are allowed for match funding. However, it can be done on a regional basis within those parameters.
As I have already stated, all of the money goes to the farmers. Europe is looking towards the environment and moving to the second pillar of the common agricultural policy (CAP), which largely relates to diversification projects and the environment. It would be foolish for people to put their heads in the sand. The Department has taken great care to ensure that farmers are trained, informed and in a position to benefit from those agrienvironment measures, including countryside management, and I am pleased to confirm uptake for those schemes.

Dairy Farmers

Mrs Iris Robinson: 3. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development what actions she has taken to alleviate the serious problems faced by dairy farmers who have suffered low refunds from the EU on dairy products.
(AQO826/01)

Ms Brid Rodgers: The purpose of export refunds is to encourage exports by compensating processors of dairy products for the higher cost of using EU-sourced raw materials under the common agricultural policy.
When world dairy commodity markets declined in 2001, my officials and I worked hard to secure increases at the EU Milk and Milk Products Management Committee meetings. I also raised the matter with Margaret Beckett, the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. I impressed on her the need to put pressure on the EU Commission to secure an increase in export refunds. Moreover, in advance of the crucial EU Management Committee meeting on 24 January, I ensured that Commissioner Fischler was made aware of the importance of that matter for Northern Ireland.
Export refunds for skimmed milk powder have increased from zero on 1 November 2001 to 300 euro a ton at present. I shall continue to review the market situation in conjunction with the dairy industry.

Mrs Iris Robinson: I thank the Minister for her response. Does she agree that the move, although welcome as a step in the right direction, is still not enough to alleviate the serious situation that is developing in Northern Ireland’s dairy farming sector? Does she agree that a further rise is needed at the Committee’s next meeting? Does the Minister accept that the dairy farming industry in Northern Ireland, which generates upwards of £600 million a year and a further £70 million in VAT for the local economy, as well as employing approximately 13,000 people, deserves to receive better treatment from the EU and better export refunds for their products?

Ms Brid Rodgers: At the United Dairy Farmer’s milk auction last week, I noted that there have been further falls in prices. The indications from the dairy industry are that the fall in prices would have been more severe if we had not secured increases in the export refunds. However, it is disappointing that those have not had a more positive impact on the market. I agree with the Member that it would be useful if we could get additional funding. I have asked my officials to review the market information with the industry, with a view to pressing for further increases in export refunds at future meetings of the EU Milk and Milk Products Management Committee.
I have also supported measures to help to strengthen the market. For example, private storage aid for butterfat was brought forward by two weeks at the beginning at March. That is the first time that that has happened for 10 years. Furthermore, the minimum incorporation rate for subsidised skimmed milk powder used in animal feed increased to 50% on 1 January. Both of those measures have been helpful.

Mr Boyd Douglas: Does the Minister agree that to achieve improved export refunds for Northern Ireland’s dairy sector, we need enthusiastic support from Margaret Beckett, the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs? Is enthusiastic support forthcoming?

Ms Brid Rodgers: As I have already stated, I made clear to Mrs Beckett the position in Northern Ireland at the ministerial meeting before the previous Management Committee meeting. I made the case strongly to her on behalf of the Northern Ireland industry. I am pleased to say that Mrs Beckett took it fully on board. At the Management Committee, the case for Northern Ireland was advanced by Mrs Beckett. She was supportive in that situation. That is how we managed to get the previous rise. I may have to press for another rise in the future if the situation deteriorates, but I shall do that in discussion with the industry and by talking again to Mrs Beckett.

Vision Document

Ms Patricia Lewsley: 4. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development how many responses have been received to the consultation process on the vision document; and to make a statement.
(AQO856/01)

Ms Brid Rodgers: A total of 81 written responses was received by the closing date for consultation. I have been most encouraged by the response to the consultation exercise. The conference in November was well attended, and I have held 27 bilateral meetings with key industry stakeholders. My Department is currently engaged in analysing the vision report and the responses to it.

Ms Patricia Lewsley: I too welcome the numbers of responses to the vision report. What is the timescale for the implementation of that report?

Ms Brid Rodgers: I shall need time to consider the report and the results of the consultation exercise. I shall also require time to have discussions with my Executive Colleagues, other Departments and the Committee for Agriculture and Rural Development. I aim to produce an action plan in the summer. However, some recommendations that have widespread support and that are affordable within existing provision may be implemented earlier. For example, we may be able to move on areas such as information technology and communications technology; training; animal and plant health; agrifood and the supply chain; the environment; representation of the interests of Northern Ireland; and the food body, before we come to the action plan areas in which we are already engaged.

Milk Prices

Mr P J Bradley: 5. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development what her assessment is on the effect that milk quota transferred from the UK is having on the current milk prices in Northern Ireland.
(AQO827/01)

Ms Brid Rodgers: The transfer of wholesale milk quota between regions of the United Kingdom has been permissible only since 1 April 1993. In the interim, Northern Ireland has benefited from the revised arrangements, with the net quota transferred to Northern Ireland each year ranging between 13 million and 63 million litres. That has helped to improve the structure of dairy farms in Northern Ireland. It has not had any adverse impact on the prices paid to producers for their milk.
A reduction in the prices received by producers in recent years has stemmed first from the strength of sterling, which has been acknowledged by the payment of agrimonetary compensation to dairy farmers in 2000 and again in 2001.
The sector has recently faced a weakening of the international markets on which the Northern Ireland industry relies heavily, and there have also been reductions in export refunds. My officials and I have been working hard to secure an increase in export refunds in the hope that that will improve prices paid to consumers.

Mr P J Bradley: I thank the Minister for the depth of her reply. Would dairy farmers be better off if they had not purchased milk quota from GB?

Ms Brid Rodgers: Farmers who decided to purchase milk quota did so to help improve the structure of their farm business and farm income from the point of view of scale. Had they not done so, their businesses would not have remained viable. The additional quota has also benefited the milk-processing sector by maintaining and generating employment, and by enabling the sector to use its assets more efficiently. On the whole it has been beneficial, and we are not any worse off for having the additional milk quota.

Twenty-Day Livestock Movement Standstill

Mr Billy Armstrong: 6. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development when she expects to relax the 20-day livestock movement standstill.
(AQO828/01)

Ms Brid Rodgers: I draw the Member’s attention to the changes that I have made, which became effective from 4 February 2002. The holding standstill no longer applies to cattle and pigs — and moved-in cattle and pigs will be subject to a 30-day standstill. Other cattle and pigs in the herd will no longer be subjected to a standstill period. The current 20-day standstill period for sheep will continue to apply to the entire holding.
Although I am content with veterinary advice that the risk of disease in cattle and pigs in Northern Ireland is now low, it would be prudent to maintain existing foot-and-mouth disease controls on sheep until after the stress of lambing, when the position will be reviewed.

Mr Billy Armstrong: Does the Minister agree that the 30-day standstill period on individual animals currently in place could be lower and would still have the effect of reducing the number of notifiable disease cases? It could also reduce the number of tuberculosis and brucellosis cases in Northern Ireland. That would reduce the amount of compensation paid, and would also make the Northern Ireland farmer more health conscious.

Ms Brid Rodgers: The 30-day standstill period for the movement of cattle and pigs reflects the residency period for intracommunity trade. It is necessary to reflect the shared desire in Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland to control the spread of a range of animal diseases. Some animal diseases — unlike foot-and- mouth disease — have a 30-day incubation period. That is the reason for the 30-day standstill requirement.

Value-Added Dairy Products

Mr Roy Beggs: 7. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development how she is encouraging the development of value-added dairy products in Northern Ireland.
(AQO855/01)

Ms Brid Rodgers: Although the Northern Ireland dairy industry makes an important contribution to the agrifood industry, it is heavily reliant on the export of dairy products. Therefore, in order to enhance future prosperity, it is vital that the industry focuses on the development of high value-added dairy products. To this end my Department has supported several projects under the EU processing and marketing grant scheme to develop high value-added products.
Food technologists from Loughry College continue to work with a wide range of processing businesses in the dairy sector to identify and take advantage of niche market and other market opportunities through the development of new milk drinks, cheeses and cream products. Specialist training is provided to those engaged in the development of value-added products, and scientific research is also carried out with industry groups.

Mr Roy Beggs: Does the Minister acknowledge that, during the period of direct rule, the Northern Ireland Office was, to a degree, negligent in its failure to address the overreliance of the milk sector, on milk powder in particular? Does she agree that, although intervention and funding from the state can play a role in the short term, developing value-added products with alternative uses, which will increase dairy farmers incomes, will be vital in the long term?

Ms Brid Rodgers: I do not wish to comment on the period of direct rule. I had no responsibility for that, and it is a matter of opinion. There is now a need to restructure the industry and to take whatever steps we can to assist it, including processing and marketing grants that help develop those products. The industry accepts the need for structural change in the long term, with more emphasis being placed on value-added products, and possibly some rationalisation, in order to build economies of scale.
Although public money cannot be spent in order to achieve rationalisation, assistance can be made available to support investment in value-added production. That is an area on which we are already focusing, and on which we shall continue to focus.

Mr John Dallat: Does the Minister agree that the setting up of co-operatives is one way to encourage the development of value-added products? Is that provided for in her plans for the future of the agrifood industry?

Ms Brid Rodgers: The vision report encourages the coming together of various parts of the food chain to develop horizontal and vertical links. My Department provides financial and technical assistance for the establishment of co-operatives by producers, including those that are intended to help to add value to primary production. I have recently had meetings with one sector of the industry that is attempting to do that. In addition, the mushroom sector has come together in order to achieve better results. I am anxious to assist and enhance any proposal made by the industry, and to facilitate it on the basis of encouraging the co-operation that is proposed in the vision report.

CAP Reform

Dr Alasdair McDonnell: 8. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development what discussions have taken place on CAP reform (a) within Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland; (b) within Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales; and (c) with the British Government; and to make a statement.
(AQO862/01)

Ms Brid Rodgers: I have had several recent discussions on CAP reform in Ireland and Great Britain. In late January, I met Joe Walsh, the Republic’s Minister for Agriculture, Food and Rural Environment, at the North/ South Ministerial Council agriculture sectoral meeting and confirmed with him that our priority should be the protection of the ability to export to Third World countries, and the retention of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) blue box exemptions for direct payments to farmers.
Early last week, I met with my Scottish and Welsh counterparts in Edinburgh. Later in the week, we met the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Margaret Beckett, in London. Those discussions covered our approach to the mid-term review of the Agenda 2000 agreement. My negotiating stance in those discussions is that, although there are valid reasons for reform, we must endeavour to ensure that reform is on a scale and at a pace that does not put unacceptable pressure on farmers and their families, or that causes difficulties for the viability of the rural economy.

Dr Alasdair McDonnell: In the context of the expansion of the European Union and the consequent pressures that may arise, will the Minister expand further on what she has outlined on reform and related issues? With regard to agriculture, how shall we be affected by the expansion of the European Union?

Ms Brid Rodgers: There are valid arguments for reform, including the competitiveness of European Union products, environmental concerns, the level of stability of farm incomes, budgetary constraints and the "Berlin ceiling", and trade and enlargement considerations. All those elements mean that there will be change. We must be able to manage that change.
We must try to ensure that whatever reform takes place is on a scale and at a pace that does not put unacceptable pressure on farmers, and that it will not cause problems for the viability of the rural economy and rural communities.
There are social and narrow economic issues to be considered. I have been making those points. We want no isolation or marginalisation in rural communities, and we do not wish to create a situation whereby rural communities may "fall off the edge". Due to the nature of our industry and the number of small farms in Northern Ireland, it is extremely important that the pace of change can be absorbed and the farming community can be sustained through it. We must make the important point that change is coming and is inevitable. However, we must manage that change.

Agricultural Subsidies

Mr George Savage: 9. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development whether there has been overpayment of agricultural subsidies in the past year; and to make a statement.
(AQO853/01)

Ms Brid Rodgers: There has been no general overpayment of agricultural subsidies in the past year. Individual cases of overpayment arise when the completion of administrative checks or information from inspections or investigations show that the initial assessment of entitlement, based on the claim made by the farmer, was incorrect. In such cases, the details are entered on the Department’s debtors’ ledger, and in accordance with EU regulations, the Department is obliged to pursue recovery of the overpayment. In the past year, 384 new debt cases amounting to £255,176 were recorded in the Department’s debtors’ ledger. That represents around only two cases per 1,000 claims processed and around 0·14% of the total value of subsidy payments made.

Mr George Savage: I welcome the Minister’s statement. Will the money be recouped?

Ms Brid Rodgers: There is an obligation on the Department to recoup the money, and it will be recouped in due course.

Meeting with Irish Agriculture Minister

Mr Barry McElduff: 10. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development when she will next meet Mr Joe Walsh TD, Minister for Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, and what issues will be on the agenda.
(AQO860/01)

Ms Brid Rodgers: My next formal meeting with Mr Walsh will be at the North/South Ministerial Council agriculture sectoral meeting, which will take place in April. Our agenda will include items such as animal and plant health research and development, issues of mutual interest linked to CAP reform, WTO negotiations and cross-border rural development. In the interim, I may contact Mr Walsh on an informal basis if issues arise that affect both jurisdictions.

Mr Barry McElduff: I thank the Minister for her detailed answer. Does she agree that a single island agricultural economy offers the best future prospects for the farming community and industry, North and South?

Ms Brid Rodgers: I thank Mr McElduff for his question. Within the remit of the North/South Ministerial Council there is recognition by Minister Walsh and myself that in many areas — such as animal health — a North/ South all-island strategy could be useful. Regardless of political positions or persuasions, that is recognised across the community as being beneficial to everyone and threatening to no one. There are common agriculture priorities on the island. It makes common sense to work together through the North/South Ministerial Council to co-ordinate our activities and efforts when they can benefit the people of Ireland as a whole.

Good Farming Practice Initiative

Mr Eugene McMenamin: 11. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development what assessment she has made of the recently launched good farming practice initiative; and to make a statement.
(AQO858/01)

Ms Brid Rodgers: My Department recently launched the Farming Today in the LFA training programme for farmers in less-favoured areas. The programme, which has been designed in partnership with the industry and funded under the Programme for Government, contains two elements — good farming practice and good business sense. Both elements are delivered locally and have a practical workshop style closely linked to the needs of participants. The good farming practice element is designed to help farmers in less-favoured areas meet new environmental obligations that are a condition of LFA and agrienvironment support payments.
Those payments are worth approximately £30 million annually to the local agriculture industry, and failure to follow good farming practice puts the payments at risk. The Farming Today in the LFA programme is now open for business and is attracting considerable interest from the farming community. To date, approximately 3,000 farmers have registered to participate in one or more elements of the training programme.

Mr Eugene McMenamin: How is the initiative linked to the rural portal that was recently launched by the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development?

Ms Brid Rodgers: The rural portal is an ICT-based gateway designed to provide farmers with a means to simply and conveniently access information relevant to their business. It was funded under the Programme for Government and is a further example of the investment that we are making to help the industry to meet today’s challenges and to adapt to the needs of the future. Although the good farming practice programme cannot be delivered through the rural portal, it will be used to make information available on both elements of the Farming Today and the LFA training programme. That information will include details of the programme and how farmers can apply to participate.

Mr Gerry McHugh: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. In relation to the last question —

Mr Donovan McClelland: I am sorry, Mr McHugh, I was calling you for question 15.

Countryside Management Scheme

Mr Gerry McHugh: 15. asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development to detail (a) the number of applications made to the countryside management scheme; and (b) the number accepted.
(AQO859/01)

Ms Brid Rodgers: Is question 15 the next question? What happened to questions 12, 13 and 14?

Mr Donovan McClelland: The Members are not in the Chamber, so they cannot be called.

Ms Brid Rodgers: I am sorry, Mr Deputy Speaker. I was somewhat confused.
A total of 1,010 applications were received when the countryside management scheme was first opened for applications, of which 280 were subsequently withdrawn or rejected as being ineligible. The finance available allowed 400 applicants to be offered management agreements, and 330 applicants subsequently accepted agreements and entered the scheme. A second round of applications was conducted between May and July 2001, and 1,457 applications were received, including applications from people who were unsuccessful in the first application exercise. Of this total, 356 applications have subsequently been withdrawn or rejected as ineligible —

Mr Donovan McClelland: I reluctantly have to stop the Minister now, because we are past our time.
Motion made:
That the Assembly do now adjourn. — [Mr Deputy Speaker.]

Attacks on Families in Coleraine

Mr John Dallat: I am grateful for the opportunity to recount the experiences of my constituents, who have lived through three years of hell, suffering attack after attack by so-called Loyalist paramilitaries. Those attacks have at times been sustained and at other times spasmodic, depending on the mood of the thugs who carry them out.
I am pleased that David McClarty is on the Bench opposite and will also contribute to the debate. I thank him for his unequivocal support and leadership during that period — no ifs, no buts and no excuses, and that is the way it should be. Any politician who finds excuses for terror groups who commit crimes against innocent people have nothing to contribute to the development of democracy. In simple terms, they are a sad bunch.
More than 200 attacks have taken place over the past three years. Some of the attacks were minor, but nevertheless they have been a living nightmare for the victims. Other attacks have been very serious: unexploded pipe bombs by the dozen, pipe bombs exploding in living rooms, and gunfire accompanying pipe bomb attacks. Public houses have been shot up and have been burnt out. Over the past two years, there have been 55 pipe bomb attacks alone, with a catalogue of incidents involving murder, attempted murder, pipe bombs, intimidation and so forth. The majority of those attacks were against Catholics, and were carried out in the name of Protestants, without their approval. Those carrying out the outrages have no mandate from anyone and not only have they hurt the Catholic community grievously, they have offended the Protestant community, which wants no part of their evil doing and has said so time and time again. Attacks have not been exclusively against Catholics. Anyone who gets in the way of these people is fair game, with at least one Protestant family in exile because it dared to stand up to them.
The police have had recent success against these evil elements, and I hope that there will be many more. In 2000, eight searches were carried out; 20 people were arrested and six charged. In 2001, the number of searches doubled to 16; 18 people were arrested and nine charged. I am sorry that such success did not come sooner because many children have been traumatised by the violence used against their families. The impact of this sustained campaign has been psychologically devastating, and the mental agony cannot be quantified. The fallout will go on for years and may well have ruined the educational potential of the victims. It has damaged their personalities and everything that makes them individuals in their own right. "Suffer little children…".
In the meantime, those behind these attacks lead comfortable lifestyles, developing legitimate businesses, feathering their nests, laundering their ill-gotten gains and setting themselves up as mandarins with power over whole communities. Surely it is time to bury the Mexican spaghetti western images of the past, when hard men entered towns and told people to leave or they would be shot before dawn.
The Housing Executive has the responsibility to make safe the homes of those who are attacked. It has fitted deadlocks to doors and, on occasions, replaced glass with safety material capable of stopping pipe bombs. The Housing Executive could have done so much more if it had been permitted. Too often, families have been offered alternative accommodation in areas known to be more dangerous than those out of which they were intimidated. Why should families that have committed no crime, been found guilty of no offence and that have hurt no one, have to leave their homes and flee to England for safety? That is a denial of a basic human right — the right to live in one’s own community, free from intimidation and violence.
On occasion it has been suggested that this is the work of a criminal element with no affinity to any known organisation. Such an explanation may well satisfy the consciences of some, but the pattern of events shows that the attacks have been highly organised and switched on and off at will as the situation demands.
When the number of attacks reached epidemic proportions more than a year ago, church representatives in the Coleraine area spoke out in the strongest of terms against them. The community as a whole expressed its opinion loudly and clearly. The police issued an eight-point plan to deal with the situation. Attacks ceased for a considerable period, but they started up again, focused largely on Gaelic sports clubs and culminating in the death of a young man who, it is believed, died when handling a deadly device. He was less than twenty years of age, little more than a child. The young person had been lured into an organisation with nothing to offer anyone, irrespective of which community he or she comes from. Since then there have been no attacks, but there have been death threats and one attempted murder. People are on edge, not knowing when these evil people might be successful in claiming yet another life.
No one believed that it would be easy to come out of 30 years of violence. There might even be complacency; because people are no longer dying in their dozens on the streets of our cities and towns — Omagh excepted. We cannot allow ourselves to become complacent, and we cannot afford to allow terror groups to dictate law and order, to decide where people can and cannot live or to adjudicate on whether people should live or die. We cannot have a situation in which brave witnesses, who are prepared to give information to the police, are intimidated and forced to withdraw their statements and tell the warlords that they will not do it again. Too much has been gained, and too much has gone into the peace process to allow that to become the norm. If we do, there is a real risk that the opponents of the peace process will use such activity as an excuse to consolidate their negative thinking and bankrupt policies. The terrorists want that. Then they are free to go on lining their pockets with the proceeds of peddled drugs, laundered fuel, cheap cigarettes, protection money and all the other schemes that they have devised to get rich on the back of a beleaguered community.
In Coleraine, and well beyond, there is a determination not to let the law of the jungle prevail. There is genuine desire to ensure that good triumphs over evil; trust overcomes fear; and happiness replaces the pain that has been felt by so many over the last 30 years. We must build on that, encourage it and reward the good people, many of whom work in voluntary community groups with meagre resources. Given encouragement and leadership we can chart a new beginning. We are doing just that, but the message must be sent out time and again that the days of the bully boys are over.
Irrespective of what community they claim to represent, there must be no future for the men of violence or the opportunities that they crave to divide people on a sectarian basis. Those opportunities must be removed forever. It is surely time to step out into the no-man’s-land in the divided community, to take risks for peace and to be brave and not afraid of setbacks or of displeasing some people in the process. It is time to put away the graffiti brushes, replace the murals of anger with messages of love and to build bridges of trust, rather than so-called peace walls.
In Coleraine, good people are determined to put the past behind them. However, that will not happen without leadership from the politicians, action from the police, initiatives from community leaders and direction from the Assembly. From now on there must be more to unite us than to divide us. As the peace process gains momentum, no one must be left behind.
The innocent families who have yet to experience the benefits of the peace process that has so much to offer everybody, must not be left on the platform of despair, abandoned and alone. That would undermine the very essence of the Assembly, which is encouraging equality for all in every respect. There is renewed hope and determination to shake off the images of the past. Above all, there is a realisation that success can only be achieved by partnerships built on a solid foundation of trust, based on respect for differences and acceptance of diversity.
The hard men who have done so much to hurt people and damage the image of Coleraine have nothing to contribute. In most cases the godfathers do not live in the local community but direct their campaign of terror from outside it. It is time for the authorities to reel them in and to allow the ordinary, decent people to continue the long haul to permanent peace and political and economic stability.

Mr David McClarty: I was born and raised in Coleraine, and I have lived in the town all my life, except for a brief sojourn in another area of the Province. Coleraine borough has always prided itself on its many wonderfully positive attributes: its geographical position on the north coast, its many natural attractions and tourist amenities, and its excellent record of good community relations. Coleraine was fortunate to have been spared the worst of the troubles that have afflicted the Province for the last 30 years.
Today, the community in Coleraine, for the most part, remains united against violence, bigotry and intolerance. That is why it is regrettable that this debate exposes the negative elements that exist in the town, which seek to drag the people of Coleraine in a direction in which they have no wish to be taken.
Unfortunately, the image of intolerant, violent and thuggish behaviour raises too often its ugly head from the gutter of society. Despite all the positive aspects of Coleraine, there is no point in disguising the fact that sinister sectarian and non-sectarian behaviour permeates the majority of law-abiding residents.
All such behaviour is sickening, senseless and reeks of bigoted intolerance. That intolerance is directed against religion, race and even age. It is worrying that the non-sectarian attacks that we increasingly hear about on our streets, including Coleraine’s, appear to be more senseless than ever before. Often they are unprovoked and without the slightest shred of justification.
Last week I searched the BBC News website for all the news stories associated with Coleraine. I was shocked by the litany of reports of pipe bomb attacks, shootings, assaults, robberies, stabbings and deaths all of which bore headlines such as "Arrests after girl, 11, shot", "Loyalists blamed for pipe bomb attacks", "Shots linked to feud", "Armed robbery at restaurant", "Man injured after attack by gang", and "Man wounded in shooting". The list continues. There is little doubt that over the past few years Coleraine has had more than its fair share of paramilitary and non-sectarian incidents. People have the right to live peacefully, walk safely and sleep securely in their homes. Those rights are basic in other democracies. Here, however, they elude too many people too much of the time.
What should be the response to those incidents and threats? I have a couple of suggestions to make. First, murderous sectarian attacks, for example, pipe bombings, shootings and beatings, are often carried out because the narrow-minded perpetrators justify their actions as being carried out on behalf of their community. Those actions resonate with their superficial sense of justice. Much good work is going on in Coleraine, as in other towns in the Province, to try to break down the community fences that have been reinforced over many years. Young people from both traditions must learn that their violent actions are self-defeating and purposeless, serving only to destroy their own community. They must get to know the "other side", and make it a friend rather than an enemy.
Secondly, in both sectarian and non-sectarian attacks the culprits feel little fear. Their attitude appears to be "chances are we will get away with it, so what have we got to lose?" The Assembly must restore to the minds of criminals the realisation that justice will eventually catch up with them. The wider community has always had a large part to play in that. Support for the police is vital, and everyone must be encouraged to tell them what they know about a crime. Furthermore, the police must be active on the ground and be seen to be so. That restores a community’s confidence in law and order and gives a sense of security, both of which are now at a low ebb. Attacks on homes and on people are to be condemned outright. Criminals, thugs and the paramilitaries must learn the difference between right and wrong and should be punished accordingly.
I am pleased to say that Coleraine remains a pleasant place in which to live and work. Many problems are not unique to the town, or, indeed, to the Province. That is no excuse for ignoring the trauma that families experience after an attack. Nor is it an excuse for not finding adequate solutions to the problems that we face. Members must endeavour to play a part, to find ways to resolve the intractable problems that are associated with narrow-minded bigotry — the attacks on homes, the pipe bombings and shootings and the senseless, thuggish behaviour that is endemic in a mindless few. Unfortunately, it is a continuing task. However, for evil to succeed it requires men and women of good will to do nothing. I and other elected representatives in the area pledge ourselves to continue the work of reconciliation.

Mr Gregory Campbell: I join the two Members in universal and unequivocal condemnation of the acts of violence in the Coleraine area.
Two basic underlying themes should be the cornerstone of our approach to acts of violence, from any source. They should be the cornerstone from the beginning of what is euphemistically called "our troubles" to date, and in the future.
One cornerstone, which is apparent today, is that there should be absolute condemnation of, and unequivocal opposition to, violence. For my party and myself, that has always been the case. I am thankful that it has been the case for most in our society for 30 years. However, it has not always been the case with some in our society, as some have declined to condemn acts of violence.
To merely condemn the violence is, however, insufficient. Some have refused to condemn it, and continue to do so. Some condemn violence, but go no further. The two principles are unequivocal condemnation and support for all the institutions that try to bring to justice those responsible for the violence. That has not always been the case either.
Across Northern Ireland — and in some parts of Coleraine, but, I am thankful to say, not too many — there has almost been a pick-and-choose mentality towards those two fundamental themes. I hope that those two principles will soon be cornerstones for everyone. I hope that one day soon we will not only unequivocally condemn violence, but unequivocally support the police and other institutions that are responsible for bringing the perpetrators of violence to justice.
I have outlined my approach to the violence in Coleraine. Two of my East Londonderry Colleagues, Mr McClarty and Mr Dallat, mentioned that many of the incidents have left families bewildered, angry, concerned and fearful. As the Member of Parliament for the area, I have had cause to visit many of the families to try to be of assistance, as have other Assembly Members and local councillors. It is difficult to help at those times, because people want an assurance that such incidents will not happen again. It is difficult for public representatives to give that assurance.
It is only when the two cornerstones are in place, and everyone, from all sections of the community, is united in condemning violence, and equally united in supporting the forces of law and order to bring people to justice, that some confidence can be given to the victims that their nightmare might be nearing an end.
Further to my general point and my expression of support for the families who had to suffer the attacks, I will make an analysis of the current problem. It would be much easier to simply condemn the attacks, to ask everyone to support the police in pursuing the people responsible and to leave it at that. If I did that, there would undoubtedly be knowing nods not only from all around the Chamber but from those who subsequently read the comments in Hansard. However, I would be doing myself an injustice if I left it at that.
In 2002 in Coleraine, as in other areas, there is frustration in parts of the community that police numbers have been so affected by the implementation of the Patten Report that violence is much more difficult to detect. It is felt that it is much more difficult to apprehend the criminals because of the Patten Report, because police stations are under threat and because police numbers are being reduced.
Many people in the Coleraine area and across Northern Ireland are at a loss to understand how on the one hand there is public hand-wringing and condemnation of violence, while on the other there is support for the reduction in the numbers of police who are trying to deal with that violence. We must therefore examine ways to beef up the numbers of available personnel and to provide more resources for the police to ensure that criminal activities cease.
Other Members referred in various ways to some of those activities. Many attacks have been nakedly sectarian. Some have been against innocent Catholics, some against innocent Protestants. Others have been nothing to do with religion at all. The last couple of weeks saw the first anniversary of the death of an elderly man whose murder in Coleraine town centre appeared to be the result of mindless violence with no religious or political overtones whatsoever. There have been attacks on a variety of people in the Coleraine area for a multiplicity of reasons.
However, the environment and atmosphere created not only in Coleraine but across Northern Ireland by political institutions that command neither the consent nor the support of the Unionist community leave a breeding ground for violence in parts of that community that I and others have to combat. We have to pressurise, lobby, argue and persuade people that the way to address those issues is by the democratic route and not through violence, its promotion or its support. That becomes increasingly difficult when every opportunity has been taken to make the point to the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister, the Secretary of State, or to the Prime Minister in the House of Commons, that we need a system of government in Northern Ireland that we can all support, and they have simply dismissed that and have said that they will proceed with the Belfast Agreement.
It is more and more difficult to reason and argue with elements of the Unionist community and to tell them that the democratic route is the only way to make changes to the system. Unfortunately, that means that the difficult task must continue. I will not be dissuaded. I will argue, lobby, campaign, persuade and pressurise every element in my community that is open to persuasion to ensure that in this Assembly, in local councils and districts, in Westminster and anywhere else a forum is available to establish a properly accountable system of government with proper consent and support in our community. It will not be achieved by throwing pipe bombs or by carrying out acts of violence. That is reprehensible; it should be condemned and it must cease. I hope that it will.

Mr John Kelly: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Mr Campbell’s analysis of what has happened in Coleraine and other parts of the community is hard to reconcile. He said that the violence occurred because there was no democracy. I find his attitude, particularly towards recent events in Coleraine, ambivalent, ambiguous and, in that context, inappropriate for an elected representative. He chooses to call it the Loyalist community or the Unionist community, but it is not the Loyalist community or the Unionist community in its entirety. Those in that community who are responsible for the attacks are those who continue to oppose the concept, ideas and democracy of the Good Friday Agreement. The last Member who spoke suggested that those who attacked innocent Catholics and Nationalists were motivated by their opposition to the Good Friday Agreement. That is unacceptable.
Built into that is a sectarianism that has nothing to do with the Good Friday Agreement. It has nothing to do with the issues that the last Member raised. He said that over the past 30 years his party attempted to reduce sectarian tensions; we know the contrary to be the case. It has used the long spoon to sup with Loyalist paramilitaries from his community.
As Mr Dallat knows, sectarianism does not affect Coleraine alone. It exists in south Derry also.

Mr Donovan McClelland: Mr Kelly, I must remind you that the wording of the Adjournment debate is specific. It refers to attacks on families in Coleraine. Irrespective of which side of the House, I advise you not to deviate from that.

Mr John Kelly: The previous Member to speak strayed a remarkable distance from the issue of attacks in Coleraine. However, these attacks are endemic in Coleraine and in other parts of our society. Surely, the cornerstone of any society is a policing service that enjoys the confidence of all people. It is interesting that the previous Member to speak attributes many of the problems to the implementation of the Patten Report. Does he agree with the Patten Report, or does he think that it has not fulfilled the expectations intended of it?
Attacks that are motivated by sectarianism, wherever they occur, are to be condemned. Attacks on people in their homes because of their religion, whether Catholic or Protestant, are to be condemned. The ethos of political ambiguity and political ambivalence that create the climate in which such attacks are given credence must also be condemned.
I assumed that the previous Member would have been the last person to speak about political violence, given his party’s position.

Mr Boyd Douglas: I had not intended to speak on this subject today — I had not thought much about it. However, it seems in order that I do.
I categorically condemn all attacks on anyone in Coleraine, from wherever they come. I have always condemned such attacks and I always will. No one has the right to attack anyone else or their property. Mr Dallat said that the pipe-bomb attacks in Coleraine were carried out by Loyalists. I do not know whether the perpetrators were Loyalists. It is interesting that Mr Dallat, who supported the referendum and the Belfast Agreement at the last election, supported the so-called peace process with three Loyalists who also backed the agreement and the referendum. If he now says that those so-called Loyalists are attacking Roman Catholic people in Coleraine, something must have happened to have caused them to move so far apart.
I was amused to hear David McClarty’s diatribe on how this process has damaged Coleraine. He also supported the Belfast Agreement. Like Mr Dallat, he stood up in Coleraine town hall and did his utmost to put down the RUC. I was there. Mr Dallat spoke briefly to attack the RUC, saying that they should be disbanded. He then left the meeting. David McClarty stayed on at the meeting and was very supportive of the agreement. He also said that there should be a change in the police force. I would have no difficulty with a change in the police force, provided that it were an improvement.
Those people worked together in the so-called peace process. Today, they criticise the many people in the Coleraine area who have tried their best to achieve the peace that everyone is talking about. Not much has been said about the Protestant people in the Coleraine area who have suffered attacks over the past 30 years.
I know that we are not supposed to move away from the subject of attacks in Coleraine, but the person who was injured in Magilligan last week has many relatives in Coleraine. No mention has been made of him and of how his life has been destroyed. Nor has any mention been made of the way in which one of the Members for East Londonderry, John Dallat, used the RUC for his protection over the past 30 years. Many Roman Catholics were protected by the RUC and other security forces, and they should be very careful — [Interruption].

Mr Donovan McClelland: Mr Douglas, I caution you about deviating from the subject of the debate. The debate concerns attacks in Coleraine, and is not an opportunity for an attack on Mr Dallat.

Mr Boyd Douglas: I am not attacking Mr Dallat in particular. We must remember that these people benefited from the protection of the security forces, who did their best to ensure the well-being of everyone in East Londonderry, which includes Coleraine.
If we, as public representatives, are to work together for the peace that everyone talks about, we must be careful what we say in the future. We must continue to work together if we are to achieve peace in Coleraine and elsewhere. As public representatives, we need to ensure the continuity of the process. We cannot simply use opportunities such as this one to attack individuals because the proper system has not been put in place. I agree that we should always support fully the security forces. We should all have done that for the past 30 years.
Adjourned at 4.40 pm.